AGENDA MEETING of the UTAH STATE BOARD of REGENTS January 14, 2005 Utah State Board of Regents Office of the Commissioner Of

AGENDA

MEETING OF THE UTAH STATE BOARD OF REGENTS

January 14, 2005

Utah State Board of Regents Office of the Commissioner of Higher Education Board of Regents Building, The Gateway 60 South 400 West Salt Lake City, Utah 84101-1284 STATE BOARD OF REGENTS MEETING BOARD OF REGENTS OFFICES, THE GATEWAY SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH January 14, 2005

AGENDA

9:00 a.m. - WELCOME AND OVERVIEW 9:15 a.m. Board Room

9:15 a.m. - MEETINGS OF BOARD COMMITTEES 10:45 a.m.

Academic, Career & Technical Education, and Student Success Committee (“Programs Committee”) Board Room

ACTION: 1. University of Utah – Master of Urban Planning Degree Tab A 2. Salt Lake Community College – AAS Degree in Broadcast Video/Audio Production Tab B 3. Salt Lake Community College – AAS Degree in Film Production Technician Tab C

CONSENT: 4. Consent Calendar, Programs Committee Tab D A. Southern Utah University – Minor in Legal Studies B. Salt Lake Community College – EDDT/Machining Technology Certificate of Completion C. Utah College of Applied Technology – OWATC Fast-Track Medical Coder Certificate of Proficiency

INFORMATION: 5. Majors’ Meetings – Common Course Numbers Report Tab E 6. USHE Program in Correctional Facilities Report Tab F 7. Progress Report, Position Papers – Chief Academic Officers Tab G

Finance, Facilities and Accountability Committee 4th Floor Executive Conference Room

ACTION: 1. UHEAA – Approving Resolution, SBR Student Loan Revenue Bonds, Series 2005W and X Tab H 2. University of Utah – Property Transaction with Utah Department of Transportation Tab I 3. Snow College – Non-State Funded Project (Tentative) Tab J

CONSENT: 4. Consent Calendar, Finance Committee: Tab K A. USHE – Money Management Reports B. USHE – OCHE Discretionary Funds Report C. UofU and USU – Capital Facilities Delegation Reports

INFORMATION: 5. USHE – Briefing on Governor Walker’s Budget Proposal Tab L 6. USHE – Briefing on Student Financial Aid Tab M

11:00 a.m. - REGULAR BUSINESS MEETING AND COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 12:00 noon Board Room

1. Reports of Board Committees Programs Committee (Tabs A - G) Finance Committee (Tabs H - M) 2. General Consent Calendar Tab N 3. Report of the Commissioner 4. Report of the Chair

12:00 noon - LUNCHEON MEETINGS 1:30 p.m.

STATE BOARD OF REGENTS (Executive Session) 4th Floor Executive Conference Room

Chief Academic Officers Ednet Room

~~~~~~~~~~

Projected times for the various meetings are estimates only. The Board Chair retains the right to take action at any time. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, individuals needing special accommodations (including auxiliary communicative aids and services) during this meeting should notify ADA Coordinator, 60 South 400 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84180 (801-321-7124), at least three working days prior to the meeting. TDD # 801-321-7130. Tab A, Page 1 of 29

Memorandum

January 5, 2005

TO: State Board of Regents

FROM: Richard E. Kendell

SUBJECT: University of Utah request to establish a Master of Urban Planning Degree – Action Item

Issue

Officials at the University of Utah (UU) request approval to offer a Master of Urban Planning Degree within the College of Architecture and Planning.

Background

The proposal for an Urban Planning Master's Degree follows the transfer of the undergraduate urban planning program in 2003 to the Graduate School of Architecture, which was subsequently renamed the College of Architecture and Planning. The proposed professional master's degree program is designed to address concerns associated with a rapidly growing urban population within the State of Utah.

In preparing this program, the dean and faculty of the College met with the Utah Chapter of the American Planning Association, the Steering Committee of Envision Utah, the Board of the Coalition for Utah’s Future, the Utah Transit Authority, the City of Salt Lake (Mayor, Chief of Staff, Planning Director), the City of Provo (Mayor), the Urban Land Institute, the Governor’s Quality Growth Commission, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Budget, private corporations involved in large planning projects such as Kennecott Land, smaller developers such as ProTerra, the Wasatch Front Regional Council of Governments, and numerous local planning consultants.

Discussions with constituent groups indicated that there was great support for the enhancement and development of urban planning at the University of Utah. The constituent groups strongly recommended that the focus of the program, as distinct from other programs in the nation, should be on the unique urban problems of the “new west.” These are characterized as rapid population growth, cultural diversification, inter-governmental complexity, environmental management (water and air), fragile landscape protection, recreation and tourism, public lands planning, rural towns, regional transportation, and low density sprawl. It was also noted that these issues are very similar to problems in developing, third-world cities.

Tab A, Page 2 of 29

The proposed program will offer opportunities for specialization in three areas: (1) Design and Preservation, (2) Environmental Planning, and (3) Land Use, Growth and Transportation. The curriculum will ensure that students gain competency in problem formulation, research skills, and data gathering; they will engage collaboratively in problem solving, plan-making, and program design; and they will be able to apply statistical and mathematical techniques to define problems, create alternatives, and evaluate policy outcomes. The program is designed to meet the accreditation standards of the Planning Accreditation Board (PAB).

Policy Issues

The USHE institutions were in support of this proposal.

Commissioner’s Recommendation

The Commissioner recommends that the Regents approve the request from the University of Utah to offer the Master of Urban Planning Degree, effective Spring 2005. A report on the progress of the approved program should be provided to the Regents two years following the program’s commencement.

______Richard E. Kendell, Commissioner REK/PCS Attachment

Tab A, Page 3 of 29

ACADEMIC, APPLIED TECHNOLOGY AND STUDENT SUCCESS COMMITTEE

Action Item

Request to Offer a Master in Urban Planning Degree, Beginning Spring 2005

University of Utah

Prepared for Richard E. Kendell By Phyllis C. Safman

January 5, 2005

Tab A, Page 4 of 29

Section I: The Request

The University of Utah requests approval to offer a Master of Urban Planning Degree effective Spring 2005. This program is expected to be approved by the Institutional Board of Trustees on January 10, 2005.

Section II: Program Description

Complete Program Description

In July 2003, the existing undergraduate urban planning program was officially transferred to the Graduate School of Architecture, which was renamed the College of Architecture and Planning (SBR information item, September 2003). This change is an important indicator of the increased visibility and prominence that the University intends for this field. The proposed graduate degree would be offered in the new College. The proposed graduate degree would be a professional degree similar to other professional degrees at the University.

The program is designed to meet the accreditation standards of the Planning Accreditation Board (PAB). Core requirements will exact substantive knowledge regarding: (1) the structure and functions of urban settlements; (2) the history of planning practice and theories of the planning process; and (3) the administrative, legal, and political aspects of plan-making and program implementation. In addition, students must select a specialization area for a concentration of three additional planning and planning-related courses. The specialization will be declared in the student’s second semester in the program in consultation with the program director.

The overarching purpose of the curriculum is to ensure that students gain competency in problem formulation, research skills, and data gathering; that they can engage collaboratively in problem solving, plan-making, and program design; and that they can apply statistical and mathematical techniques to define problems, create alternatives, and evaluate policy outcomes.

The proposed curriculum offers a core of required classes, a required workshop, and a capstone exercise of a professional project, a professional internship, or a master’s thesis. It requires a minimum of 41 credit hours (43 with the choice of a thesis), completed over at least four semesters of study. This course load, though greater than the University’s M.S. degree standards, is typical of accredited professional planning degrees nationwide. The curriculum also offers the opportunity for students who have studied urban planning as undergraduates to test out of up to 11 credit hours, representing specific core course requirements. The full curriculum of the program is found in Appendix A. Purpose of Degree

Urban planning is a rapidly growing professional field. More and more communities, governments, and corporations are recognizing that problems such as suburban sprawl, pollution, social inequities, and traffic congestion threaten the quality of life and economic development potential.

4 Tab A, Page 5 of 29

Utah has a rapidly growing urban population, and organizations like Envision Utah have spent considerable energy in raising awareness of urban problems. Envision Utah, a project of the civic organization Coalition for Utah’s Future, is a nationally known organization of business, community, real estate, and non-profit organizations concerned with greater awareness of regional growth issues. It has done a remarkable job in outlining a plan to protect Utah's environment, economic strength, and quality of life. Now is the time to solidify the public’s awareness and desire for quality growth that these community leaders have nurtured, by preparing a cadre of planning professionals who can carry out the vision. A nationally accredited urban planning graduate degree will provide Utah with the professionals needed to preserve critical lands, manage growth, promote water conservation and clean air, preserve historic resources, improve our region-wide surface transportation system, and provide housing options for all residents. This is an urgent need in the State.

In preparing this program, the dean and faculty of the College have met with a variety of constituent groups and learned that that there was great support for the enhancement and development of urban planning. The constituent groups strongly recommended that the focus of the program, as distinct from other programs in the nation, should be on the unique urban problems of the “new west.” These might be characterized as rapid population growth, cultural diversification, inter-governmental complexity, environmental management (water and air), fragile landscape protection, recreation and tourism, public lands planning, rural towns, regional transportation, and low density sprawl. It was also noted that these issues are very similar to problems in developing third-world cities. These needs are not usually addressed in traditional urban planning programs, which tend to focus on problems inherent to aging cities with declining populations and outmoded industries. The program will offer opportunities for specialization in three areas: (1) Design and Preservation, (2) Environmental Planning, and (3) Land Use, Growth and Transportation.

Like other professional programs, such as law or architecture or medicine, planning programs produce students who focus their efforts on the most crucial issues facing the nation – and the world – from environmental degradation to economic development, from substandard housing to the protection of open spaces. Because both the academic and professional side of planning address society’s most important problems, nine of the University of Utah’s ten official peer- institutions, and most of the nation’s most prestigious schools, have accredited planning programs.

Admission Requirements

Students applying for the Master of Urban Planning Degree program must apply through the Graduate School admissions process at the University of Utah. Students in the graduate degree program must have a 3.0 undergraduate grade point average, submit two letters of recommendation, and present a statement of their professional intentions, which will be evaluated for content as well as communication skill. International applicants must submit to the TOEFL exam. The College will also require the GRE for applicants, except for written exceptions granted by the program chair for non-traditional students.

5 Tab A, Page 6 of 29

Student Advisement

The proposed program will have a faculty advisor and a staff advisor. The faculty advisor will be the Planning Program Chair. The staff advisor will be the College’s academic advisor. Materials describing program requirements, recommended curricula, course schedules, and faculty specializations will be maintained and be available to students in both digital and tangible forms. Students will be advised individually and in small groups prior to admission. They will have ongoing access to advisors throughout their residency. Advisors will also stand ready to assist with guidance pertaining to the sub-fields of planning practice, the organization of planning internships, and the professional placement of students as they approach graduation. Both regular and adjunct faculty will be apprised of the importance of this function and will be pressed into service to assist with guidance and professional placement.

Justification for Number of Credits

This program will be submitted to the Planning Accreditation Board (PAB), a national accreditation organization for the urban planning profession. PAB requires certain competencies that cannot be accomplished in a 36 credit hour program without an undergraduate component in urban planning. Therefore, the proposed degree program for those without an undergraduate degree is a minimum of 41 hours. This number of credit hours is very similar to professional degree programs nationwide.

6 Tab A, Page 7 of 29

External Review and Accreditation

Dr. Chris Silvers, University of Illinois, President of the American Collegiate Schools of Planning, and Dean Frederick Steiner, University of Texas, outgoing Chair of the Planning Accreditation Board (PAB), were involved in the development of the proposed program. With their help, the proposed program was designed to meet requirements of the PAB. The College expects to be admitted to Candidacy Status for Professional Accreditation within two years of Regents’ approval.

The PAB sets out curriculum conditions that demand substantive knowledge regarding the structure and functions of urban settlements, the history and theory of planning practice, and the administrative, legal, and political aspects of plan-making and program implementation. PAB also requires student competency in: problem formulation; research and data gathering; collaborative problem solving, plan-making, and program design; and the use of statistical and mathematical techniques to define problems, create alternatives, and evaluate policy outcomes. The program’s curriculum is designed to meet these requirements.

In addition to specific skill sets and knowledge groups, the PAB sets out specific institutional and organizational requirements of accreditation: first, a program must have at least three full-time tenure-track faculty and five FTE faculty total; and second, the program must be a semi- autonomous unit with its own governing processes. PAB standards also require that the program be a professionally-oriented curriculum, rather than a research or liberal arts/social science orientation, and that the name of the degree contain the word “Planning.”

With the addition of two new tenure-faculty members in 2004-05, the Urban Planning division meets the PAB minimum faculty requirement standards. An important reason for moving the Urban Planning Program from the College of Social and Behavioral Science to the College of Architecture and Planning was to place the planning program within a professional college that is oriented towards professional education and has arranged for an organizational structure, including a semi- autonomous governance structure, which will allow professional accreditation.

The decision to develop a new master’s degree and have it accredited, versus accrediting the existing baccalaureate degree, reflects the planning profession’s evolution to a much greater emphasis on graduate education as the terminal professional degree. This is a trend throughout most professional degree programs including architecture, which has discontinued the accreditation of new baccalaureate degrees nationwide. The U.S. Department of Labor Statistics makes the following statement concerning the education of planners:

“Most entry-level jobs in Federal, State, and local government agencies require a master's degree in urban or regional planning, urban design, geography, or a similar course of study. …A master's degree from an accredited planning program provides the best training for a number of planning fields. Although graduates from one of the limited number of accredited bachelor's degree programs qualify for many entry-level positions, their advancement opportunities often are limited unless they acquire an advanced degree.”

7 Tab A, Page 8 of 29

The accredited degree is the accepted professional credential that allows a graduate, with appropriate experience, to sit for the Certified Planner examination (AICP). PAB standards may be found at http://showcase.netins.net/web/pab_fi66/page3.htm.

No additional expenses are expected to meet PAB accreditation requirements, other than the site visit for initial accreditation, which has already been committed by a donor.

Projected Enrollment

Enrollment is expected to be strong even in the beginning of the program, based on inquiries and applications. The proposed graduate program will be limited to the top 18 applicants per year. The FTE faculty listed here includes all faculty who teach graduate classes. However, some of these faculty also teach undergraduate classes, which is not accounted for in the student/faculty ratio.

Projected Enrollment Degree Program 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 MUP 15 25 30 30 30 30 FTE faculty 5 5 5.25 5.25 5.25 5.25 S:F ratio * 3.0 5.00 5.7 5.7 5.7 5.7

Expansion of Existing Program

The proposed program is a substitution for the Master of Science in Architecture (specialization: Urban Planning). The first year of the specialization is the 2004-05 academic year. There are 15 graduate students enrolled in this program, who will be offered a transfer to the Master of Urban Planning (MUP) program if it is approved. (These students have been strongly cautioned that the MUP Degree is pending and may not be approved).

Faculty

There are four tenured or tenure track faculty and one research faculty who comprise the full-time urban planning faculty. A cadre of experienced professional planners as part-time adjuncts will continue. There is no need for additional full-time faculty anticipated in the first five years of the program. Appendix C lists the full-time faculty and the adjunct faculty teaching in the graduate program.

Staff

The program will be supported by the current staff of the College, including a portion of the duties assigned to the financial officer, the advisor, the network manager, and the development officer. A new part-time grants writer has been hired to assist planning faculty, in particular, to develop research proposals.

8 Tab A, Page 9 of 29

Library Resources

The Marriott Library has developed a solid collection to support the Urban Planning program. There are about 5000 monographs emphasizing contemporary English language titles from major trade and professional society publishers. The Library subscribes to 75 percent of the most cited journals in Urban Studies and in Planning and Development. The interdisciplinary focus of urban planners will be supported by the graduate level collections the Library already provides in architecture, social sciences, and engineering.

As the program commences, the faculty is committed to identifying sub disciplines where the Library needs to build the collection. Library staff are committed to supporting the College in offering new degree programs.

Learning Resources

The main learning resources that are needed to support the graduate planning program include facilities, computer networks and peripherals, and computer lab and software. The College has sufficient network capacity and receives funding annually to support updates. Urban planning software for the computer labs is the main on-going expense, since it needs to be updated annually. The labs and software are used primarily by undergraduate classes, however. Facilities are adequate for the next five years, but not ideal. The College will be preparing a facility plan in the next year to plan for additional space for all programs, but especially to support the Urban Planning undergraduate program and added research activities.

9 Tab A, Page 10 of 29

Section III: Need

Program Necessity

Program need is indicated by reactions from the local business, civic, and professional communities; by the responses of potential students; by measures of labor market demand published by the Utah State Department of Workforce Services; and by the proposal’s relationship to a high institutional priority.

The leading professional organization, the Utah Chapter of the American Planning Association (APA), has long called for the development of a Master’s Degree in Planning at the University. In addition, a major community advocacy group, Envision Utah, has similarly embraced the development of a professional degree. Professionals working in local government have expressed great relief that their needs might be fulfilled. In a letter of support from Stephen Goldsmith, former director of the Salt Lake City Planning Department, he wrote: “…for the purposes of this letter of support for a vitally needed program, please know that (the Dean’s) plans to grow the field of planning in Utah is way overdue. The planners who worked for me in Salt Lake City were years behind in their understanding of how we need to integrate complex city building elements if we are to effectively heal, repair and transform our places.”

An urgent need might also be inferred by the level of gifts received in less than one year to support the start-up of the Urban Planning Program – over $125,000 from organizations like the Utah Transit Authority, the Governor’s Quality Growth Commission members, the local APA chapter, local foundations, and Envision Utah. To put this in perspective, the Graduate School of Architecture’s gift total in 2001-02 was $155,000.

Currently the rank order of the proposed degree within the proposing institution is number one.

Labor Market Demand

The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics maintains, in cooperation with the fifty states, a Labor Market Information System. It provides projections of annual job openings by detailed occupational category including the category of “urban and regional planner.” The Utah Labor Market Information System at http://jobs.utah.gov/wi/pubs/Outlooks/State/ provides the following projections for job openings in urban planning for the State of Utah:

Table 1: Utah Occupation Projections, 2000-2010, US Bureau of Labor Statistics Employm Annual Job Hourly Wage ent Openings Rep Training Occupation lace 200 201 Gro Averag Level - Total Entry 0 0 wth e me nts Urban & Regional Master’s 250 350 10 10 20 $14.80 $22.00 Planners Degree

10 Tab A, Page 11 of 29

Year 2000 employment was 250. Projected employment by 2010 is 350. The number of annual openings due to growth and replacements is 20. The required training level is a master’s degree. At its peak, this program will graduate approximately 18 students per year.

In addition to Utah, Nevada, Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming do not have accredited degree programs in urban planning, creating a potential regional market in some of the fastest urbanizing areas of the country. Labor market projections estimate there will be 15-20 job openings annually for urban and regional planners in those states, particularly in Nevada. The proposed program can expect to serve a substantial fraction of these needs, too. One indication of this is the University of Utah alumni database that shows that 33 U of U graduates with baccalaureate degrees in Urban Planning were either drawn from or now work in the surrounding states.

Student Demand

Student demand is expected to be strong. With minimal discussion of the possibility of the graduate program, the College received inquiries from more than 30 potential applicants. This fall, fifteen of these enrolled in the Master of Science in Architectural Studies while following the proposed urban planning curriculum with the expectation of being transferred to the Master of Urban Planning program once it is approved. Also, many current University of Utah undergraduate students in planning, environmental studies, family and community studies, and geography have inquired about Spring term and subsequent admission to the proposed program. At a visit to Utah State University’s Landscape School, the Dean was inundated with questions from graduating seniors interested in applying to the U of U’s graduate program in Urban Planning.

Another indicator of student demand is the extraordinary growth of the Urban Planning undergraduate program in the past year, as it was moved into the College of Architecture and Planning and gained greater visibility. Most of the beginning undergraduate classes have doubled in enrollment and have waiting lists. The College has also begun a new program of public outreach and public relations that is expected to raise visibility and recruitment success, increasing the quality of applicants to the proposed program.

Demand from outside the immediate area is likely to be strong, as well. The MUP program at the University of Utah would be well positioned to attract regional, national and international students pursuing a professional career in planning. Utah is the fourth fastest growing state in the U.S. Its neighbors -- Nevada, Arizona, Colorado and Idaho -- make up the remainder of the five fastest growing states. The growth pressures faced by the western region are typical of the entire range of planning issues facing urban regions globally. Meeting the transportation and land use demands of rapid growth while protecting farmland and neighboring ecosystems, and maintaining a high quality of life across an increasingly diverse population are the fundamental challenges facing urban planners today. Each of these issues is reaching critical proportions in the Wasatch Front and is generating innovative and interdisciplinary approaches to problem solving.

Utah is nationally recognized as being on the cutting edge of participatory and inclusive planning with initiatives such as Envision Utah. Some problems, such as gang violence, ghettoized poverty and massive congestion, are less acute in Utah than in other regions allowing planners and

11 Tab A, Page 12 of 29 students to learn more quickly from the effects of various intervention strategies. The presence of a graduate planning program in Salt Lake City at a time of tremendous growth will not only inform regional planning discourse, but will also provide an invaluable learning opportunity for planning students wanting to learn from the regional experience irrespective of their ultimate career location. The MUP Program at the University of Utah will be able to attract students who want a pedagogical experience embedded in a real world laboratory.

Similar Programs

Nationwide there are 89 accredited programs in planning at the graduate level and 16 at the undergraduate level. At present, there are no accredited urban planning programs in Utah, Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, or Nevada. Among public universities in the region, there are graduate planning programs at Arizona State University, the University of Arizona, the University of Colorado, and the University of New Mexico.

Utah State University (USU) offers two degree programs that are related: (1) the Master of Landscape Architecture (MLA), which has a strong site analysis component; and (2) the Master of Science in Bioregional Planning, which focuses on large scale rural regions in an agricultural context. The MLA is an accredited degree in landscape architecture. No other program in the Utah System of Higher Education seeks to train urban and regional planners who work at the city and metropolitan level and who are directly responsible for safeguarding the urban planning process.

Collaboration with and Impact on Other USHE Institutions

No higher education institutions in Utah currently offer professional degrees in urban planning. The College has established excellent supportive relationships with the leaders of the two departments that are somewhat related at USU (see above). Such collaboration is expected to entice many high-quality applications from USU’s undergraduate degree holders. Many students study at the College of Architecture and Planning (CA&P) as undergraduates and subsequently go to graduate school at USU’s Department of Landscape Architecture and Environmental Planning (LAEP). The department chair of LAEP and the dean of CA&P are reciprocal members of each other’s advisory boards and cooperative offerings are likely if logistics can be overcome. The programs at USU are complementary to this proposal in that they offer very different perspectives (biological, ecological, e.g.) on sustainability, urban growth, and other urban issues.

Benefits

An important benefit to the University of Utah is greater visibility in critical issues of urban growth and sustainability, linked with the ability to offer important expertise to the community. One of the important legacies of former U of U President Machen—which President Michael Young has reinvigorated – is the involvement of the University in community issues. The West Side Initiative has been the premiere engine for this involvement. This activity dovetails with the Master of Urban Planning Degree program. Recently, for example, undergraduate urban planners engaged in an economic development project for one of the West Side’s important citizen groups. The graduate program will be able to offer extensive expertise and project research to support a much wider array of community efforts, including working with local organizations like Envision Utah, the Nature Conservancy, the Utah Community Development Corporation, the Governor’s Quality Growth

12 Tab A, Page 13 of 29

Commission, and the Utah Transit Authority, all of which have expressed their interest in interaction with the new program.

The USHE benefits by offering, for the first time anywhere in the System, a professional degree program in Urban Planning. The research generated by the faculty and students in the proposed program will be critical for many local organizations and governments, including the State of Utah, local jurisdictions, and regional authorities like the Wasatch Front Regional Council. The State will also benefit from having up-to-date research on, for example, the relationship of land use and air pollution. Moreover, this initiative builds on the successful national reputation that the State of Utah has earned as a leader in innovative environmental planning.

Consistency with Institutional Mission

The mission statement of the University of Utah emphasizes the (1) “highest standards of scholarship and professional practice” as well as (2) “the mutual relevance and interdependence of teaching and research.” It seeks to (3) “foster the discovery and humane use of knowledge and artistic creation” and to (4) “facilitate the application of research findings to the health and well- being of Utah’s citizens through programs and services available to the community.”

College faculty serve on State and national boards, national accreditation teams, and hold membership on the American Institute of Certified Planners. Faculty have recently been invited to serve on national panels for the Department of Transportation, the Utah Transit Authority, and ASSIST, and have already participated in grant proposals totaling more than $300,000. In addition, the undergraduate Community Planning Workshop has a 25-year history of service to the community through studio-based planning, project and program design. The College’s collective history of research includes investigation of earthquake risk, housing market dynamics, the interdependency of land use and transportation, community development history, urban design policy, design guidelines and design review, suburban form, urban metabolics, and conflict mediation in the public domain. Thus, the faculty and students in the College of Architecture and Planning are continually involved in the mission of the University.

Section IV: Program and Student Assessment

Program Assessment

The program has three intermediate term goals: a. Achieve accreditation with the Planning Accreditation Board within four years of approval of the degree by the Board of Regents. This is a very intense process involving curriculum evaluation against specific outcomes, student assessment, as well as a site visit. If the goal has been met, the graduate degree will be recognized as a professional degree with all the rights pertaining for graduates. b. Develop a program of outreach to the community that results in multiple-year funding of outreach, service learning and studio projects. Within five years, an outreach center for urban planning will be self-sustaining with at least one full-time staff and three graduate assistants. c. Develop interdisciplinary research in environment, growth management, urban development and design. The goal is to have the five full-time faculty participating in

13 Tab A, Page 14 of 29

funded research of over $1 million per year within three years.

The long term goal, as stated in the College’s strategic plan, is to have the program recognized nationally with a very specific focus on “new world cities” – shorthand for rapidly growing, globally- oriented cities located in delicate landscapes.

Expected Standards of Performance

Students who graduate from this program will have the following core competencies: a. Students will be able to identify and describe specific urban and regional problems and to formulate research and strategic questions. b. Students will be able to perform research and data gathering in the substantive areas of urban planning, including familiarity with appropriate quantitative and qualitative methods. c. Students will use collaborative techniques to evolve plans, especially working in small groups and with non-professional audiences. d. Students will use the planning process to develop a plan, evaluate it and create alternatives. e. Students will have substantive practical knowledge in at least two of the following areas: transportation, land use, sustainable growth, environmental planning, urban design, urban systems analysis, urban planning law.

These areas of competency are a combination of the requirements of national accreditation and the focus areas expected to be developed in the graduate program.

Student Assessment

Summative assessment will be used to judge the overall efficacy of the program in meeting its stated learning and professional objectives. There are three mechanisms that will be used: First, the national accreditation process provides a standard of measurement and comparison to other graduate programs and provides a periodic review of the program’s teaching and learning effectiveness and curricular appropriateness. Second, students who graduate from the program will be eligible, with some practical experience, to take the Certified Planner examination. Results from this examination, where available, will be used to assess the program. Finally, the accreditation process recommends an alumni and employer survey to monitor student perceptions of the utility of various components of the program both as they enter the job market and after several years working in the profession. Employer surveys will be used to contextualize student preparation for the professional market place.

Formative assessment will be made throughout the curriculum as students progress through the various components of the required program. Both authentic assessment, based on evaluations of student performance mimicking real world scenarios (in Workshop classes, for example), and substantive knowledge assessment, based on evaluating students’ capacity for critical and theoretical thinking, will be used for student, teacher and program feedback. Due to the highly interactive and interdisciplinary nature of the planning profession, student assessment will tend to include verbal as well as written communication of assigned work. Problem-based learning and reflective practice assignments will be integral to the required Workshop to further simulate and

14 Tab A, Page 15 of 29

prepare for professional practice. Student performance in course assignments including papers, projects, presentations and examinations, as well as teaching evaluations and formal course feedback will all contribute to an ongoing assessment of student acquisition of knowledge and skills. Each student will be required to complete a capstone project that will be reviewed by all faculty.

Continued Quality Improvement

The faculty and the dean will closely monitor the reactions of students, alumni and employers to the program. Revisions in the curriculum and in specific course requirements and teaching processes will be assessed every Spring in anticipation of the coming academic year, based especially on this feedback and on the faculty review of graduate capstone projects. Every five years, the accreditation process will be expected to provide substantial outside feedback that will improve the quality of the program.

Section V: Finance

Budget

As of July 2003, the budgets of the College, the Architecture program, and the Planning program have been separated so that each can be clearly monitored. This is also a requirement of accreditation standards. The budget numbers provided here represent the costs for the entire urban planning division, since those costs allocated to undergraduate vs. graduate study are difficult to determine and likely to change year to year. As a division, the only significant expenditure for Planning is faculty salaries (operating costs are aggregated at the college level). Beginning in 2004-05, the College was able to hire two full-time tenure track faculty members to add to the one existing full-time tenured faculty member. In addition, a full-time research associate professor transferred from another College on campus, bringing with him substantial research funding. This brings the total of permanent planning faculty to five (see Appendix C), three of whom are full-time tenure-track appointments devoted exclusively to the Urban Planning Degree program.

In addition to the three tenure-track faculty, some tenured faculty in architecture will teach courses in Urban Planning. In the chart below, there are three classes of faculty: auxiliary faculty, who are part-time appointments teaching urban planning classes, architecture faculty who are full-time appointments but teach at least one course in urban planning (includes the dean), and full-time urban planning faculty (tenure track). These are expressed as Full-time Equivalents (FTE). The Planning Accreditation Board requires at least three full-time tenure-track faculty appointed in Urban Planning in order to accredit the degree program. The other two FTE faculty that are required by PAB may be part-time professionals or involved in other academic programs.

Table 3: Faculty and teaching, CAP urban planning division, 2004-09 Faculty Classification 2004-05 2005-06 2006- 2007- 2008- 07 08 09 Tenure Track Appointed in Planning 3 3 3 3 3

15 Tab A, Page 16 of 29

Architecture Faculty FTE in Urban .75 .75 1.0 1.0 1.0 Planning Auxiliary Faculty FTE/Persons 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 Total FTE Faculty 5 5 5.25 5.25 5.25 Teaching Assistantships – Full Year 1.5 2.5 3 3.5 4

Some teaching assistantships for urban planning graduate students will also be supported. It is expected that the new full-time faculty will generate substantial additional research funding and a corresponding increase in graduate research assistantships (not reflected in these projections).

With faculty salaries, teaching assistantships, benefits, and minor amounts of operating costs (marginal to the current CA&P college budget), the program is expected to have a total budget (FY 06-07) of $373,775 representing both graduate and undergraduate offerings. Table 4 summarizes these costs.

Table 4: Annual Budget, undergrad and graduate urban planning Budget Item 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 Tenure Track Faculty in Planning 167,500 170,850 174,267 179,495 184,880 Faculty Allocated from Architecture 45,000 45,000 60,000 62,000 64,000 Auxiliary Faculty 28,000 28,000 30,000 30,000 31,000 Teaching Assistantships 13,500 22,500 27,000 31,850 36,400 Marginal Operating Costs (travel, 10,000 15,000 18,000 18,000 20,000 staff) Benefits 58,275 61,380 64,508. 66,233 68,010 Totals $322,275 $342,731 $373,775 $387,578 $404,290

Funding Sources

Expenditures are offset by the expected new inflow of graduate student credit hours (SCH) and an increase of 25 percent in undergraduate (upper-division) student credit hours over the same period. This “productivity” factor represents the re-allocation of growth funds between university departments based on actual student enrollment. Table 5 summarizes all the sources of funds.

Table 5: Sources of Funds, undergraduate and graduate urban planning program Sources of Funds 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 Urban Planning Base Budget 107,000 159,140 211,160 217,495 224,020 Reallocated from CA+P budget 79,500 42,000 60,000 63,000 65,000 New Sr. VP Commitments (University) 50,000 51,000 0 0 0

16 Tab A, Page 17 of 29

Estimated Productivity (SCH) 20,000 25,000 30,200 32,100 36,500 Benefits 58,275 61,381 64,508 66,233 68,010 Research Overhead 7,000 7,000 8,000 8,750 11,000 Totals 321,775 345,521 373,868 387,578 404,530

Once the full staffing is achieved in FY 06-07, no additional resources (except normal cost of living increases) are expected to be necessary through the period leading to the final accreditation (FY 2008-09) and beyond. In addition, the College has raised more than $125,000 from grants and gifts to fund start-up costs for the proposed program, which will cover all of the one-time expenditures for remodeling, curriculum development, software purchases, faculty and student recruiting, and accreditation visits associated with the new degree program.

Reallocation

There are three types of reallocation represented in the budget for the proposed program. One is the funding of two new full-time faculty positions from sources within the University of Utah academic budget. The positions also support the existing urban planning undergraduate program, which has been operated primarily with part-time adjuncts and provides a core of faculty for the graduate program. Another reallocation is the use of architecture faculty to teach up to four urban planning classes per year. Half of these classes will be cross-listed in architecture. Teaching urban planning classes creates a healthy symbiosis in the two programs and takes advantage of the four or five architecture faculty members who have strong expertise in this area. Finally, reallocation of university resources can be implied by the “productivity” funding, which is awarded annually based on the number of student credit hours that a college generates, relative to other colleges in the University.

Impact on Existing Budgets

The program will have a slight impact on the Architecture program budget, in that a small amount of faculty FTE, representing $45-65,000 of funding annually, will flow into teaching courses in Urban Planning. This is considered a positive turn of events in the College of Architecture and Planning, as it realizes efforts to more widely incorporate planning concerns into architecture. The College faculty has anticipated this change through the development of the proposals to move the urban planning program to the College and through the development of the graduate curriculum.

17 Tab A, Page 18 of 29

Appendix A: Program Curriculum

Appendix A Part One Master of Urban Planning Degree Requirements

Candidates for the Urban Planning graduate degree program must hold an undergraduate baccalaureate degree and qualify for admission based on previous grade point average, a written statement, and GRE scores. Once admitted to the program, students will pursue a course of study over four semesters of residency, except as waived (see below). Part-time study is possible. The degree consists of 41 credit hours minimum (43 if the student elects to prepare a thesis), including 29-31 credit hours of core requirements and 12 elective credit hours. The core requirements are in the table below.

CORE COURSES Course Number Title Credit Hours

a. The following courses are required: URBPL 6100 City and Profession 3 URBPL 6200 Urbanization 3 URBPL 6280 Graduate Workshop 4

b. One of the following capstone courses is required: URBPL 6954 Professional Internship 4 URBPL 6970 Master’s Thesis Research 6 URBPL 6971 Professional Project 4

c. The following courses are required unless waived based on undergraduate work: URBPL 6020 Urban and Regional Analysis OR 3 URBPL 6030 Public Participation and Consensus Building 3 URBPL 6010 Urban Research 3 URBPL 6040 Physical Plan Analysis 3 URBPL 6240 Planning Theory and Ethics 3 URBPL 6260 Planning Law and Administration 3

TOTAL CORE COURSES 29-31

Student with undergraduate planning degrees may apply for a waiver of the courses listed in C above. The Program Chair may waive the course only if a corresponding undergraduate course at the senior level (4000-5000 number courses) and of similar credit weight was completed with at least a B grade. All students must complete a minimum of 30 graduate credit hours, regardless of courses waived.

Focused Electives. The student, in consultation with the Program Chair, shall designate a minimum of 12 credit hours of electives from the following courses. Nine of the credit hours must constitute a specialization in a topic area. The specialization may be developed around a specific interest of the student. Suggested topics for specialization include, but are not limited to, land use

18 Tab A, Page 19 of 29

and growth, environmental planning, GIS and visualization, urban design, transportation, historic preservation, systems analysis, and planning policy. Students will declare a specialization during the second semester of study and will be expected to pursue that specialization in their capstone project as well. Specialization plans must be filed with the Program Chair and are dependent on the availability of suitable courses. Students are cautioned that elective courses may not be offered every year.

Students who have an undergraduate degree in planning and who are continuing study at the graduate level may not retake for graduate credit a 6000-level version of a course already taken at the 5000-level.

FOCUSED ELECTIVES Course Number Title Credit Hours

12 credit hours are required with at least nine credit hours in one specialization.

URBPL 6400 Urban Design Visualization 3 URBPL 6410 Site Planning 3 URBPL 6420 Open Space Design 3 ARCH 6230 Utah Architecture and Cities 3 ARCH 6235 American Suburban Development 3 ARCH 6262 Urban Design Theory 1.5 ARCH 6500 Preservation Theory and Practice 3 ARCH 6581 "Main Street" Revitalization 1.5 ARCH 6851 Societal Change, Architecture and Planning 3 GEOGR 6140 Methods in G.I.S. 3 GEOGR 6160 Spatial Modeling with G.I.S. 3 URBPL 6030 Public Participation and Consensus Building 3 URBPL 6270 Metropolitan Regional Planning 3 URBPL 6330 Urban Growth Management 3 URBPL 6350 Public Lands and Environmental Policy 3 URBPL 6360 Environmental Planning Law and Policy 3 URBPL 6370 System Dynamics and Environmental Policy 3 URBPL 6371 Complexity and Systems Thinking 3 URBPL 6390 Community, Economy and Sustainability 3 ECON 6250 Environmental and Natural Resource Economics 3 FCS 6730 Community Development and Environmental Change 3 LAW 7010 Mediation/Advanced Negotiation 3 LAW 7011 Mediation Clinic 3 URBPL 6020 Urban and Regional Analysis 3 URBPL 6220 Land Use Planning 3 URBPL 6300 Housing and Community Development 3 URBPL 6320 City Dollars 3 URBPL 6340 Public/Private Interests in Land Development 3 URBPL 6390 Community, Economy and Sustainability 3

19 Tab A, Page 20 of 29

URBPL 6600 Politics of Planning 3 URBPL 6710 Transportation Planning 3 URBPL 6720 Community Transport 3 ARCH 6720 Project Finance and Economics 1.5 FCS 6120 Demographic Method 3 GEOGR 6240 Locational Analysis 3 GEOGR 5440 Economic Geography 3 GEOGR 5480 Advanced Metropolitan Geography 3 LAW 7010 Mediation/Advanced Negotiations 3 LAW 7011 Mediation Clinic 3 POL S 6240 Local Government Law 3 POL S 6380 Public Budgeting and Finance 3 Sub-Total 12

20 Tab A, Page 21 of 29

Appendix A, Part Two New courses to be offered over the next five years

Many of the elective courses in the program are already offered in other academic units. The following courses are being offered for the first time in the academic year 2004-05. They will form the core and several electives for the new graduate program. Six out of the 13 courses are graduate forms of classes that have been previously taught at the undergraduate 5000 level.

NEW COURSES offered in 2004-05 Course Number Title Credit Hours URBPL 6010 Urban Research * 3 URBPL 6100 City and Profession (History) 3 URBPL 6200 Urbanization 3 URBPL 6390 Community, Economy and Sustainability 3 URBPL 6020 Urban Analysis * 3 URBPL 6040 Physical Plan Analysis 3 URBPL 6330 Urban Growth Management * 3 URBPL 6030 Public Participation 3 URBPL 6260 Planning Law and Administration * 3 URBPL 6280 Urban Planning Workshop 4 URBPL 6370 System Dynamics and Environmental Policy * 3 URBPL 6720 Community Transportation 3 URBPL 6371 Complexity and Systems Thinking * 3 URBPL 6420 Open Space Design * 3 URBPL 6350 Public Lands and Environmental Policy 3 * courses have been previously taught at the 5000 level.

The following new courses are to be developed over the next five years to respond to the focused electives. It is expected that partnerships with other departments will allow these course to be listed and/or taught elsewhere. Where this is anticipated, departments are noted. Nine URBPL courses will be offered per semester and will be taught by College faculty (including core courses).

NEW COURSES offered 2005-09 Course Number Title Credit Hours URBPL 6300 Housing and Community Development (possible 3 FCS) URBPL 6320 City Finance (possible POL, ECON) 3 URBPL 6340 Land Development (ARCH/ BUS) 3 URBPL 6600 Politics of Planning (possible POL) 3 URBPL 6400 Urban Design Visualization (ARCH) 3 URBPL 6410 Site Planning (ARCH) 3 URBPL 6350 Environmental Planning Law * 3 * courses have been previously taught at the 5000 level.

21 Tab A, Page 22 of 29

Appendix A Part Three Urban Planning Graduate Courses

6010 Urban Research (3) A hands-on course in quantitative skills used for urban analysis. Data sources, dataset development, descriptive statistics, correlation, trend analysis, modeling, and styles for graphical and written presentation. Planning applications of demographic and economic analysis including population projection, economic base analysis, and measures of characteristics and distribution.

6020 Urban and Regional Analysis (3) The economic, demographic, and spatial interaction models used to analyze and develop alternative urban and regional plans including cohort-survival, input-output, shift-share, and gravity models. Model concepts, mathematics, design, logic, and limitations. Small-scale spreadsheet models are applied to analyze problems, interpret output and present results.

6030 Public Participation and Consensus Building (3) Case studies of collaborative and consensus building practices in the planning process; effective work-group behavior, nominal group processes, interpersonal and group dynamics; participatory practices for democratic involvement; the complexity of issues, the diversity of stakeholder interests, group identify and inter-group conflicts; conflict mediation in plan/program design and implementation; adaptive approaches to adjusting decisions over time.

6040 Physical Plan Analysis (3) Analysis of the components (land use, transportation, natural systems, morphology, boundaries, demography, and typologies) of the physical city using computer applications

6100 City and Profession (3) The history and culture of the industrial and post-industrial city. The history and culture of the urban planning profession. The relationship between the two.

6200 Urbanization (3) Economic and urbanization processes. The form and structure of urban areas. Settlement patterns, migration, mobility, and suburbanization. Metropolitan regionalism, interregional competition, world urban hierarchies, and the city in a global economy.

6220 Land Use Planning (3) Land-use concepts, activities, problems, and techniques for land-use planning.

6240 Planning Theory and Ethics (3) Rationality and alternative approaches to the planning process; the scope of theory and ethics in planning; the prospects for collectively rational decision making: assorted cases and critiques; post-modern perspectives on coping with values, power, conflict, and ethical criticism.

6260 Planning Law and Administration (3) Plan implementation including legal authority for planning, zoning, subdivision regulation, urban

22 Tab A, Page 23 of 29

redevelopment; methodology and application; administrative procedures; place of planning in structure of governments; capital improvement programs.

6270 Metropolitan Regional Planning (3) Theories of metropolitan regional development; their spatial organization; implications for land use, transportation and air quality; public policy context and options.

6280 Graduate Workshop (4) Prerequisite: 2nd year standing in graduate program. Using actual clients and real-world locations, students develop a comprehensive plan and publish a final report.

6300 Housing and Community Development (3) Revitalization of central cities and neighborhoods; programs and techniques for community environmental, social, and economic development; policies regulating financing, production, consumption, and preservation or market and low-income housing.

6320 City Dollars (3) Economic, financial, and fiscal aspects of urbanization.

6330 Urban Growth Management (3) Attitudes, issues, impact, and management alternatives explored through case studies and analytical exercises. Federal and state policies, and evaluation of local growth guidance systems.

6340 Public/Private Interests in Land Development (3) Planning perspective on the competition between public and private interest in land use and development.

6350 Public Lands and Environmental Policy (3) Meets with GEOGR 5350 and URBPL 5350. Graduate students should take URBPL 6350 and will be held to higher standards and/or mor work. A review of environmental impact assessment, focusing on the policies, requirements, methods, and examples from the National Environmental Policy Act, with a review of state and local approaches to environmental impact assessment.

6360 Environmental Planning Law and Policy (3) Meets with URBPL 5360. Graduate students should take URBPL 6360 and will be held to higher standards and/or more work. A review of federal, state, and local environmental laws, policies and procedures as they affect planning including air, water, and hazardous waste, impact assessment, public lands, common law, and aesthetic regulation.

6370 System Dynamics and Environmental Policy (3) Cross listed as CVEEN 6660, GEO 6340. Environmental policy design requires an understanding of human interactions with environmental systems. It requires an accounting of the complexities of behavior, context and policy. These complexities often produce indirect and unanticipated consequences. They yield unexpected patterns and counter-intuitive results. Students from many academic fields learn user- friendly software (STELLA) to do environmental policy simulation without proficiency in advanced mathematics. Students use computer simulations to sort out environmental complexities; transform group perceptions into simulation models; apply principles of environmental management; test

23 Tab A, Page 24 of 29 policy effects and define possible pathways for future policy change.

6371 Complexity and Systems Thinking (3) Cross listed as CVEEN 6661, GEO 6341. Using actual clients and a systems thinking approach, multi-disciplinary student teams resolve real world problems in environmental complexity and sustainability. Student teams define system structures, feedback loops, counter-intuitive relationships and the unintended consequences of policy decisions. Students having completed 'System Dynamics and Environmental Policy' get to apply their experience in systems modeling in support of team efforts in full-scale, practical problem solving. Possible topics include: urban growth, drinking water, energy resources, air/water quality and environmental justice.

6390 Community, Economy, and Sustainability (3) Policies for ecologically sustainable economies and actively integrated communities.

6400 Urban Design Visualization (1.5) Cross listed as ARCH 6125. Multiple visualization techniques and the communication of planning concepts and design alternatives.

6410 Site Planning (3) Meets with ARCH 6111. Review and analysis of development site design, plat map preparation, subdivision review and impact analysis.

6420 Open Space Design (3) Cross listed as ARCH 6831. A framework for preserving and promoting cultural, ecological, developmental, agricultural and recreational assets through the design of open space plans.

6600 Politics of Planning (3) Diverse views of urban land use, neighborhood development, local governments and citizen participation. Key actors and participants in the planning process. Managing the political aspects of urban change.

6950 Independent Study (2 to 4) Graduate directed reading or individual/group projects as approved through program procedures.

6954 Professional Planning Internship (4) An internship of at least 144 hours per term with either a private planning consultancy or a public planning agency. Each internship shall be coordinated with an agency- or consultancy- based mentor through an urban planning faculty member and shall culminate in a written report on the internship product/process and an oral presentation on the internship experience.

6960 Special Topics (2 to 4) This course number is used to accommodate one-time courses, occasional courses, and experimental courses. Students may take more than one Special Topic course for credit.

6970 Masters Thesis Research (6) Each thesis in Urban Planning shall be organized under the direction of a Master's Supervisory

24 Tab A, Page 25 of 29

Committee with membership conforming to Graduate School Guidelines and presented in accordance with Graduate School Thesis Regulations.

6971 Professional Project (4) Each professional project shall be organized under the direction of a Project Supervisory Committee with membership conforming to Urban Planning Guidelines and presented in accordance with these same guidelines.

6985 Faculty Consultation (3) Repeatable. Continued consultation for Master's Thesis Project Preparation.

25 Tab A, Page 26 of 29

Appendix B: Program Schedule

Typical Course Schedule for the Masters in Urban Planning (MUP).

Fall Term Graduate Year 1 CR Spring Term Graduate Year 1 CR URBPL 6010 Urban Research 3 URBPL 6020 Urban Analysis or Elective #2 3 URBPL 6100 City and Profession 3 URBPL 6040 Physical Plan Analysis 3 URBPL 6200 Urbanization 3 URBPL 6260 Planning Law & Administration 3 Focused Elective #1 3 URBPL 6250 Planning Process & Methods 3 12 12 Fall Term Graduate Year 2 Spring Term Graduate Year 2 URBPL 6030 Public Participation or 3 URBPL 6240 Planning Theory & Ethics 3 Elective #2 URBPL 6280 Urban Planning Workshop 4 Focused Elective #4 3 Focused Elective #3 3 URBPL 6970 Thesis, 6971 Project or 6954 4-6 Internship 10 10-12

26 Tab A, Page 27 of 29

Appendix C Part One Full-time Faculty

Brenda Case Scheer, Professor, Dean

Brenda Case Scheer, AIA, AICP, is the dean of the College of Architecture + Planning at the University of Utah. She was previously a professor at the University of Cincinnati, where she taught for twelve years. Her research specializations are the formal development of cities and urban design policy. She has published many articles and book chapters on design review, architecture, housing, and suburban form. She has co-authored three books: Suburban Form: an International Perspective; Design Review: Challenging Urban Aesthetic Control; and The Culture of Aesthetic Poverty. She is the winner of the prestigious Chicago Institute of Architecture and Urbanism Prize, which is awarded for writings on urban design. Dean Scheer has a long record of professional practice, including as a principal of Scheer & Scheer, Inc., where her projects include master planning, urban design and design guidelines as well as several award-winning architectural projects. She has also been involved in sustainable development projects in Thailand and Crete. She serves on the Steering Committee for Envision Utah, a public/private partnership for quality growth, is on the editorial board of the Journal of the American Planning Association, chairs the board of Artspace, Inc., and serves on the boards of ASSIST, the Utah State University Department of Landscape Architecture, and the APA Urban Planning and Design Standards Board (national). Before entering her academic career, she was director of urban design at the City of Boston, and vice president of a real estate development company in Houston. She holds masters and bachelors degrees in architecture from Rice University and she was a Loeb Fellow at the Harvard Graduate School of Design.

Philip Emmi, Professor, Program Director

For the last 20 years, Professor Philip Emmi has directed the undergraduate program in Urban Planning at the University of Utah. Previous to that he served four years as assistant professor at the University of Southern California’s School of City and Regional Planning. Dr. Emmi’s work in 1997 with the Utah Governor’s Office of Planning and Budget prompted a deepening interest in the interaction between urban land use and urban transportation. He is currently engaged as co- principal investigator on a major National Science Foundation grant with a substantial urban systems modeling element that simulates the dynamic interaction between urban land development and urban road construction. He also participates in a phase of the NSF research that brings research results to community leaders through a series of collaborative workshops on urban growth and urban atmospheric emissions. He serves as chair of an intercollegiate committee that administers an interdisciplinary certificate program in the Adaptive Management of Environmental Systems. In 1984, he was awarded the Juan Casalduero Traveling Fellowship to Spain. In 1986 he spent six months in Barcelona on a Fulbright Scholar Postdoctoral Research Award. Between 1987 and 1995, he was awarded a series of seven summer research fellowships at the Swedish National Institute for Building Research where he developed mathematical models to aid in planning for urban housing as well as assessing the impacts of housing construction, migration or household formation events on intra-urban residential mobility.. In 1988, he brought to the University of Utah its first major grant in geographic information systems applications – a project that produced a geographically explicit seismic risk assessment and a set of related risk abatement policies for the local region. Dr. Emmi

27 Tab A, Page 28 of 29

holds a Ph.D. in City and Regional Planning and a Masters in Regional Planning from University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill as well as a B.A. in Economics (magna cum laude) from Harvard University.

Craig Forster, Associate Professor - Research

Originally trained as a hydrogeologist, Dr. Forster spent almost three decades studying and modeling groundwater flow, petroleum migration/production, carbon dioxide sequestration, solute transport and heat transfer in geologic systems. He has co-authored more than 30 peer-reviewed papers in this arena. Dr. Forster now works to bridge gaps between environmental science and public policy in urban ecosystems and water sustainability. Dr. Forster contributes to, and leads, interdisciplinary teams that build system dynamics models to map and explore the complexities, linkages and feedbacks found at the interface between social institutions and the natural environment. Recent and ongoing projects include: (1) assessing water supply and demand futures under alternate climate scenarios, (2) studying the impact of population growth on quality of life at the U.S.-Mexico border, (3) investigating airshed processes that contribute to urban CO2 emissions, and (4) evaluating alternatives for CO2 sequestration in the Southwest U.S. Dr. Forster facilitates communication within large interdisciplinary research teams that include social scientists, economists, natural scientists, urban planners and engineers. He actively contributes to the community engagement efforts that draw stakeholders and decision-makers into mediated modeling and community-based research. These efforts include facilitating University of Utah student service-learning projects in Urban Planning and Communication within an expanding network of community partners.

Keith Bartholomew, Assistant Professor

Keith Bartholomew, Assistant Professor of Urban Planning for the College of Architecture and Planning at University of Utah, is one of the nation's foremost authorities on alternative transportation and land use strategies. He is an environmental attorney with special emphases in land use and transportation planning, and community development and design. Before joining the faculty, Bartholomew was the Associate Director of the Wallace Stegner Center for Land, Resources, and the Environment at the University of Utah College of Law. He was also staff attorney for 1000 Friends of Oregon, a land use advocacy and research non-profit organization in Portland. While at 1000 Friends, professor Bartholomew directed "Making the Land Use, Transportation, Air Quality Connection" (LUTRAQ), an applied research project assessing the use of integrated land use/transportation planning as a tool to reduce automobile use and the need for new highway facilities. His publications include “The Evolution of Non-Governmental Land Use Planning Organizations,” Journal of the American Planning Association, Fall 1999 and “Making the Land Use, Transportation, Air Quality Connection,” American Planning Association PAS Memo, May 1993. His honors include the American Planning Association 1996 Current Topic Award, Environmental Protection Agency 1996 "Way to Go" Award, and 1994 German Marshall Fund Environmental Fellowship. Bartholomew holds degrees in music from Northern Illinois University and law from the University of Oregon. He is a board member of the Utah APA and the Utah Transit Authority.

28 Tab A, Page 29 of 29

Maged Senbel, Assistant Professor

Maged Senbel is an Assistant Professor of Urban Planning for the College of Architecture and Planning at University of Utah. Previous to that he taught Sustainability Planning and Landscape Architecture at the School of Community and Regional Planning at the University of British Columbia. Maged has a history of professional experience overseeing design development and working drawings for various architectural and planning projects in British Columbia. His research specializations include methods in leadership and the implementation of sustainable planning as well as integrated assessment ecological footprint analysis. He directs the Westside Studio, a cooperative project of the University Neighborhood Partners, the College of Architecture +Planning, Neighborhood Housing Services, and the College of Business. Prof. Senbel’s doctoral research included an in depth analysis of the work of the director of Smart Growth British Columbia and a study of the collaborative design processes between Smart Growth BC and partner communities in BC’s Lower Mainland. He has also conducted research on mixed use planning including home employment and flexible suburban zoning. Having worked in, and researched, sustainability planning in Vancouver, BC, he has expertise in the planning of one of the most compact, complete, and livable cities in North America. Prof. Senbel was the recipient of a number of top tier national scholarships in Canada and holds Ph.D. in Planning (fall 2004) from the University of British Columbia where he also received a Masters of Science in Planning. He also holds a Masters and Bachelors degree in Architecture from McGill University and the University of Oregon respectively.

Appendix C Part Two Adjunct Faculty

Ralph E. Becker, FAICP, J.D., and M.S. geography (certificate in planning), University of Utah; B.A. American civilization, University of Pennsylvania. adjunct professor. Professor Becker is a respected professional planner and attorney, and former planning director of the State of Utah. He is a member of the Utah legislature.

Pamela Perlich, Ph.D. economics, University of Utah; B.S. economics, University of Tulsa, adjunct professor. Dr. Perlich also holds a senior research appointment in the Bureau of Economic and Business Research at the University of Utah. Her research is in demographics, economic systems and modeling of change.

Sumner Swaner, ASLA, AICP, bachelor of Landscape Architecture, Utah State University. adjunct associate professor. Professor Swaner is an international authority in open space planning and the founder of the Green Space Institute and the Swaner Nature Preserve. He has been in planning practice for many years.

Jim Mills, Ph.D. and B.S. physics, University of Oklahoma, adjunct professor. Dr. Mills recently retired as a senior Fellow at the Idaho National Energy and Environmental Laboratory. He has multiple publications and research projects that deal with urban dynamics and sustainability, including several research projects with the full-time faculty at the University of Utah.

29 Tab B, Page 1 of 30

Memorandum January 5, 2005

TO: State Board of Regents

FROM: Richard E. Kendell

SUBJECT: Salt Lake Community College request to establish a new Associate of Applied Science in Broadcast Video/Audio Production, Summer 2005 B Action Item

Issue Officials at Salt Lake Community College (SLCC) request approval to offer an Associate of Applied Science (AAS) in Broadcast Video/Audio Production, starting Summer Semester 2005. This program has been approved by the SLCC Institutional Board of Trustees on 13 March 2002.

Background The Broadcast Video/Audio Production program is an extensive two-year AAS degree. Students master concepts and skills required for professional positions in radio and television broadcasting, video production, and audio production professions. The program includes internships through partnerships with local broadcast and production facilities. The program also includes hands- on experience with media at SLCC through the Student Media Center.

Students begin with fundamental skills training in personal, visual, and audio communication settings. These involve hands-on labs and personal production and performance assignments. The fundamental concepts behind these practices are taught as well, providing a critical understanding of why things are done in a particular way in professional broadcasting, video, and audio productions. Among the skills covered are writing, editing, vocal and visual performance, pre-production planning, studio and field production projects, and post-production editing and distribution.

Career opportunities in broadcasting, video, and audio production are extensive in today’s media-savvy world. Students can specialize in particular aspects or can seek a broader, more eclectic degree. This approach is possible by offering a broad range of elective courses that students can tailor to their needs and desires.

Tab B, Page 2 of 30

The purpose of SLCC’s Broadcast Video/Audio Production AAS degree is to fulfill industry and student demand. The proposed degree responds to a current and predicted need by the local corporate and broadcasting industry for a trained workforce. Currently there are no community college training programs in Utah for the broadcasting business that are designed to provide students with a functional set of skills meeting industry needs. The proposed degree will also meet increasing student interest in digital and technical skill areas.

The state’s leading practitioners indicate a shortage of skilled new hires, including camera operators, editors, electricians, gaffers (lighting personnel), grips (equipment movers and general assistants), video assistants, and those with converged training. Because of the shortage of trained personnel, practitioners in Utah’s broadcast industry indicate they will support an internship program in association with the proposed degree.

There are no other two-year programs (AAS degrees) elsewhere in the state or in the Intermountain Region.

By offering the AAS degree in Broadcast Video/Audio Production, SLCC benefits by providing training requested by industry, thus strengthening the community presence in its community college role and mission; USHE benefits by providing support for businesses and industry, thus improving the economic viability of the state.

Policy Issues The institutional Board of Trustees has approved this proposal. No USHE institution expressed opposition to this proposal.

Commissioner’s Recommendation The Commissioner recommends that the Regents approve the Request from Salt Lake Community College to offer an Associate of Applied Science Degree in Broadcast Video/Audio Production, effective Summer Semester, 2005.

Richard E. Kendell, Commissioner

REK/GW Attachment

2 Tab B, Page 3 of 30

Academic, Applied Technology and Student Success Committee Action Item

Request to Offer an AAS Degree in Broadcast Video/Audio Production Starting Summer 2005

Salt Lake Community College

Prepared for Richard E. Kendell By Gary Wixom Andrea Worthen

January 5, 2005 Tab B, Page 4 of 30

SECTION I: The Request Salt Lake Community College (SLCC) requests approval to offer the Broadcast Video/Audio Production Associate of Applied Science (AAS) degree program effective Summer 2005. This program was originally approved by the Institutional Board of Trustees on 13 March 2002 and was being prepared for the Regent’s agenda when the program moratorium was instituted. Following the lifting of the Regents’ program moratorium and in compliance with the revised R401, the letter of intent was presented to the SLCC Board of Trustees on 10 November 2004. On 25 October 2004, the letter of intent was presented to the Office of the Commissioner of Higher Education and to the USHE Chief Academic Officers for consideration by the Regent Program Review Committee (PRC). Following approval by the PRC, SLCC presents this updated program proposal.

SECTION II: Program Description Complete Program Description The Broadcast Video/Audio Production program is an extensive two-year AAS degree. Students master concepts and skills required for professional positions in radio and television broadcasting, video production, and audio production professions. The program includes internships through partnerships with local broadcast and production facilities. The program also includes hands- on experience with media at SLCC through the Student Media Center (SMC). (See Appendix F)

Students are also introduced to the elements, trends and consequences of the many new media technologies, as well as integrated multimedia production. This approach provides a timely and relevant education that will make them competitive for jobs in today’s highly integrated media environment. Faculty with extensive industry experience, as well as solid academic credentials, teach the courses required in the program. (See Appendix C.)

Career opportunities in broadcasting, video, and audio production are extensive in today’s media-savvy world. Students can specialize in particular aspects or can seek a broader, more eclectic degree. This is possible by a broad range of elective courses that students can tailor to their needs and desires.

Work in this profession is often fast paced, emotionally and physically demanding, involves long hours, and is highly rewarding. Students will need to establish their reputations within the corporate and commercial broadcast industry. Salaries vary widely depending upon the type of work performed and the level of experience required. Self-discipline, team commitment, tenacity, vision, and drive are important elements of success in this field.

4 Tab B, Page 5 of 30

Purpose of Degree The purpose of SLCC’s Broadcast Video/Audio Production AAS Degree is to fulfill industry and student demand. The proposed degree responds to a current and predicted need by the local corporate and broadcasting industry for a trained workforce. Currently there are no community college training programs in Utah targeting the broadcasting business that are designed to provide students with a functional set of skills meeting industry needs. The proposed degree will also meet increasing student interest in digital and technical skill areas.

Expected program outcomes include a highly trained, competitive workforce; meeting the increasing needs of industry for a trained workforce; meeting corporate needs in digital media production processes with a trained broadcasting workforce; and promotion of coordination and sharing of resources with Utah public education.

Institutional Readiness The Broadcast Video/Audio Production program AAS Degree is eagerly anticipated. Existing administrative structures recently reorganized for continuity and strengthening academic focus on teaching and learning will support the program. No new administrative or staff positions are needed. The program will be classified as vocational (career and technical education) and lower division.

Faculty SLCC officials anticipate that additional adjunct faculty will be needed in the first two years of the degree offering in order to meet student demand for course offerings as shown below. Budgets have been built to anticipate this need and adjuncts will be recruited from local industry and will be current in their professional field.

Full-Time Instructor Adjunct Faculty Year 1: 2005-06 0 3 Year 2: 2006-07 0 3 Year 3: 2007-08 0 0 Year 4: 2008-09 0 0 Year 5: 2009-10 0 0

Current full-time faculty are well prepared to provide instruction for this program. (See Appendix C.) To keep current with the profession, SLCC’s full-time faculty will annually attend two nationally recognized training programs. These are the Broadcast Education Association and National Broadcast Association Conferences.

Staff The Division Chair of Arts, Communication, and Digital Media will administer this program. The Administrative Assistant to the Division Chair and staff in the Faculty Support Services office will assist in support operations. This approach means that no additional administrative or secretarial/clerical help will be required.

5 Tab B, Page 6 of 30

Library and Information Resources The SLCC Library holdings that will support the Broadcast Video/Audio Production Program include:

Electronic Databases. Salt Lake Community College has access to several electronic databases from EBSCO Host and the International Index to the Performing Arts, which index, abstract, and in many instances provide full text articles to support this program. Full-text electronic articles are accessible from the following journals: African American Review; America’s Network; Broadcasting & Cable; Communications Week; Computer Graphics World; Computer Reseller News; Daily Variety; Electronic Media; Electronic News; Electronic Engineering Times; E Media; E Media Professional; Electronic Musician; Entertainment Design; Entertainment Weekly; Essence; Focus; Interview; Journal of Arts Management, Law and Society; Journal of Educational Television; Jump Cut; Media and Methods; Media Week; Lightwave; Millimeter – The Magazine of Motion Picture and Television Production; New Criterion; PC World; Performing Arts Entertainment in Canada; Rolling Stone; Screen; Shoot; Sight & Sound; Theatre Crafts International; TVB Europe; Variety; Village Voice; Wide Angle; Writer and others.

Print Journals. The Library System collection of print journal subscriptions includes: Broadcasting & Cable; Comment; Premiere; QST; Rolling Stone; Seven; Sight & Sound; Sound and Vision; Video Maker; Video Systems; and Writer’s Digest. Additional journals will be added to this collection as needed.

Current Books/Periodicals. The SLCC Library System contains 361 books and 79 videos regarding video production and directing, video recording, digital video, television broadcasting, television programming, television production and directing, television lighting, television play techniques, television writing and editing, broadcasting, radio broadcasting, and other subjects related to audio and video production. Additional materials will be ordered as needed.

Archived Broadcast Video/Audio Projects. The Salt Lake Valley has a substantial number of commercial firms with archived video holdings of past projects. These will be used as additional reference items for students in the program.

Admission Requirements There are no special admission requirements for this program. Admission is consistent with general SLCC open admission procedures and guidelines.

Student Advisement Students are encouraged to consult with an academic advisor who specializes in advising for this program. While in the program, students will meet with Broadcast Video/Audio Production faculty for further advising.

6 Tab B, Page 7 of 30

Justification for Number of Credits The proposed Broadcast Video/Audio Production program requires 63-69 credit hours, falling within USHE guidelines.

External Review and Accreditation The following consultants were involved in the development of the proposed program:

Richard O. Mecham: Former President, SLC Broadcast Group, KSL TV and News Radio Salt Lake City, former general manager of KSFI-FM, KRSP-FM, and KOMB-FM in Salt Lake City, and current Senior Vice President and General Manager, FM Stations, Bonneville Communications. Richard provides enthusiastic endorsement of the need for people with “hands-on” training. Many individuals would like to work in the broadcast industry, but have only general academic backgrounds. Richard addressed this issue by promoting the importance of lab time in the proposed SLCC program. He also stressed the need for people who understand not only broadcast technical skills, but related business aspects of the profession as well.

Al Henderson: Consultant and Olympic Liaison, KSL Television and Radio, former President, KSL-TV Group and President, Bonneville Media Group. Al currently is President of LVT Production in Salt Lake City, Utah. Al has been instrumental in providing general guidance on curriculum needs. Of particular value to SLCC has been his guidance on ways in which the broadcasting industry will change in the future.

Steve Wunderli: Creative Director, Bonneville Communications. Steve provided guidance on curriculum that will train students to have marketable hands-on skills in the Salt Lake market. He indicates that his organization currently must hire a majority of employees from outside of the Salt Lake area. Steve has offered to accept SLCC interns at Bonneville Communications.

Marty Kahn: Production Supervisor at DeAnza College in Cupertino, California. Marty provided guidance on new technologies in which SLCC students need to be trained. He also stressed the importance of a program, which provides easy student access to cameras and computers for hands-on training.

Pepper Gregory: Screenwriter, Public Relations, and Marketing Professional. Pepper provided initial background information on the past and current state of the broadcast industry in Utah.

The Broadcast Video/Audio Production Program Advisory Committee (PAC) consists of the following:

David Phillips: General Manager, Channel 2 Television, Salt Lake City, Utah

Steve Wunderli: Creative Director, Bonneville Communications, Salt Lake City, Utah

Richard O. Mecham: Senior Vice President and General Manager, FM Stations, Bonneville Communications, Salt Lake City, Utah

Paul Roden: Director of Video Services, Broadcast International, Salt Lake City, Utah

7 Tab B, Page 8 of 30

Craig Stoker: Applied Technology Education Director, Granite School District, Salt Lake City, Utah

Greg Windley: Handstand Productions, Salt Lake City, Utah

The PAC will guide curriculum decisions, provide feedback on program completers, provide networking opportunities for students and industry, and participate in program review activities.

Currently no national organizations accredit this type of program for community colleges.

Projected Enrollment Mean Student FTE: Faculty Student FTE FTE 2004-2005 28 24:1 2005-2006 54 24:1 2006-2007 54 24:1 2007-2008 54 24:1 2008-2009 54 24:1

Expansion of Existing Program The proposed Broadcast Video/Audio Production degree is an expansion of an existing option within the Communication department. The degree itself offers more intensive training for the graduate; however, as a representative sampling of enrollment growth in some of the courses included in this program, the following table shows the Headcount and FTE’s generated for the COM 1500 – Introduction to Mass Communication course:

Annualized Headcount Student FTE’s 1998-99 107 10.7 1999-00 157 15.9 2000-01 189 18.9 2001-02 155 15.5 2002-03 151 15.1 2003-04 165 16.5

To Date: 2004-2005 Annualized Headcount Student FTE’s Summer 12 2.4 Fall 64 12.8

The market is currently changing toward a converged (cross-trained) model. The rapidly changing technology presents ever-increasing demand for converged graduates. SLCC’s curriculum for this program is already converged training, placing SLCC students at the forefront of meeting the market’s demands.

8 Tab B, Page 9 of 30

SECTION III: Need Program Need Research and industry consultants indicate a need for trained technical support in the broadcasting industry. This proposed program was initially presented to the Office of the Commissioner of Higher Education and Utah System of Higher Education (USHE) in 2002 and was “held” by the moratorium.

Labor Market Demand The Labor Market Survey that was initially performed in 2001 has been included as Appendix D as a reference. Recognizing that representatives of the Utah broadcasting industry originally requested (in 2001) that SLCC provide this degree, and in anticipation of being able to move forward with the proposal, SLCC invited industry leaders to a breakfast meeting on September 9, 2004 in order to assess industry’s current support for the proposed program. Strong support continues to be expressed for the implementation of this program at SLCC.

In addition to those who attended the breakfast meeting on September 9, 2004, others who were unable to attend sent letters outlining their support. (See Appendix E)

One of the issues particularly addressed by SLCC and industry representatives at the September meeting was how the program would function if market demand changed. Industry representatives indicated they can only see market demand increasing due to the technology advances being made and the increasing level of skill sets desired for new hires. SLCC’s concerns in that case would be for needed additional funding to support the continued growth in the program. That issue is addressed in the budget section.

Student Demand The SLCC Admissions and Academic Advisory Offices reports that approximately 150 phone inquires are received each year by prospective students interested in the broadcasting areas. Students are aware of the proposed AAS degree offering and interest in and response to the anticipated approval of the program and the ability to register for that offering are extremely positive.

Similar Programs There are no other two-year programs (AAS degrees) elsewhere in the state or in the Intermountain Region.

9 Tab B, Page 10 of 30

Collaboration with and Impact on Other USHE Institutions The USHE Master Plan 2000 outlines nine major commitments to students and job training in Utah. The proposed Broadcast Video/Audio Production program satisfies three of the listed criteria:

Expanding opportunities for Career and Technical Education Collaboration with Public K-12 Education Promoting Economic Development through Training

There are no similar two-year degrees currently offered in the USHE as demonstrated by industry’s initial approach to SLCC regarding the development of and continued enthusiastic support of the program.

Although this is an AAS program (designed for job preparation), other institutions will accept portions of the program credit hours toward graduation. Utah Valley State College will accept credit toward the BS degree in Technology Management; Utah State University will accept credit toward the Broadcasting, Video & Audio BS program; Southern Utah University will accept credit toward the BA/BS in Communications with an emphasis in Broadcasting; and Weber State University and Brigham Young University already accept many of the course offerings. Discussions are ongoing with the University of Utah in their Communication department.

Broadcast Partnership - Public Schools. The Wasatch Front Consortium, a group of public school district Career and Technical Education (CTE) directors, voted to support SLCC’s effort in development of a Broadcast Video/Audio Production program. The Wasatch Front Consortium requested that high school students enroll in concurrent education classes that provide Broadcast training.

Some of the public schools involved in this important partnership are Taylorsville, Kearns, Skyline, Highland, and Granger. In addition, Juan Diego Catholic High School also connects to Broadcast training through Broadcast concurrent education.

The concurrent enrollment program between the College and public schools serves as an excellent example of education that saves the taxpayers of Utah money, and promotes earlier completion of college level classes by students while they are still in high school. Students have the potential of having completed up to four years of Broadcast training by the time they graduate from SLCC, advancing the goal to establish a program that will link high school and college programs together in a sequential, non-duplicative format.

Benefits By offering the AAS degree in Broadcast Video/Audio Production, SLCC benefits by providing training requested by industry, thus strengthening the community presence in its community college role and mission; USHE benefits by providing support for businesses and industry, thus improving the economic viability of the state.

10 Tab B, Page 11 of 30

The proposed program will provide numerous opportunities for support from federal funding agencies that are currently being explored. Financial support is expected to continue to come from local companies.

As the proposed program is implemented, it will emphasize meeting the needs of non- traditional students (via night classes), promoting technological and vocational training, and promoting economic development for the state, all of which are part of SLCC’s mission and goals.

Consistency with Institutional Mission The Broadcast Video/Audio Production AAS degree offering is consistent with the SLCC mission statement as evidenced by the following:

1. Vocational and Technical Education resulting in marketable job skills in a changing world. 2. General Education and pre-professional programs for transfer to other colleges and universities. 3. Adult and Continuing Education in cooperation with business and industry to enrich the opportunities of citizens. 4. Developmental Education designed to support students making a special transition to college life. 5. Community Services Education providing services and activities that promote community involvement.

Specifically, Broadcast Video/Audio Production is a vocational, technical program that will result in marketable job skills for the changing broadcast industry; that has been designed in cooperation with business and industry to enrich the opportunities of citizens; and provides services and activities that promote community involvement.

SLCC Strategic Vision and Relationship to Institutional Strategic Goals. During the 2000- 01 academic year, the College engaged in a series of activities to develop a strategic vision that would guide the College for the next five years. Six strategic goals were established. The Broadcast Video/Audio Production program directly relates to the six strategic goals as follows:

The program will provide on-the-job training in a digitally emerging area. SLCC recently established a business relationship with COMCAST. The College, along with cities in the Salt Lake

11 Tab B, Page 12 of 30

Valley, broadcast daily programming on Valley TV (which is cable channel 17.) Cities partnering with the community college on this project to date are Taylorsville, Murray, Draper, and Sandy. Each city decides what programming it will provide to this channel, and events such as council meetings, public hearings, and special reports typically are aired.

In addition, SLCC provides programming during time slots not utilized by cities. Types of offerings provided by Broadcast students at the College include debates between public officials, basketball, volleyball, or graduation ceremonies. In the future, Broadcast students will receive hands-on training by producing and directing events such as dance concerts, choir performances, and various faculty projects.

Goal 2 SLCC will provide a contemporary assortment of career-oriented degree and certificate programs and credit and non-credit courses designed to ensure graduates have the skills and knowledge needed to enter and advance in high-demand occupations. The program will provide training to satisfy industry demand for skilled technicians. Non-credit training opportunities can be added in the future for those in the industry who wish to upgrade skills.

Goal 3 SLCC will make optimum use of technology to enhance learning and maximize the effectiveness and efficiency of College operations. The program will use digital technologies in instruction and hands-on training. Internships with the local broadcast industry will give students the opportunity to train in first-generation digital technologies.

Goal 4 SLCC will enrich the educational experience of all learners by respecting and encouraging diversity. Through the SMC, some student production projects will focus on special programming for ethnic minorities in Utah.

Goal 5 SLCC will be a leader in the economic, cultural, and educational life of the Salt Lake and Tooele communities and will partner with other organizations to share its resources and expertise in order to fulfill its mission as the community’s college. The program will utilize local industry for on-the- job training and advisory support. The PAC is made up of industry leaders. Support has been received for implementation for an internship program.

Goal 6 SLCC will foster a strong, positive, and consistent image as a vigorous, innovative organization that meets student, employer, community, and regional needs with an impressive assortment of contemporary programs and services. The program was created in response to strong, sustained industry requests and student demand.

12 Tab B, Page 13 of 30

SECTION IV: Program and Student Assessment Program Assessment Goals for the Broadcast Video/Audio Production program and SLCC measurements of success follow:

# Goal Measure 1 Enroll a maximum of 24 students per year Enrollment data 2 Eighteen or more students will achieve their completion goals Student survey data annually 3 Achieve 90% job placement for those seeking employment Employment data 4 Achieve 90% level of employment satisfaction of student intern Grade data and employer work interviews 5 Include representatives from at least eight television or media PAC roster firms on the SLCC Broadcast Video/Audio Production PAC 6 Recruit high school Broadcast students into the SLCC Registration data Video/Audio Production Program

Expected Standards of Performance A DACUM (Developing a Curriculum) was initially held in January 2002 to assist in curriculum development. The DACUM process utilizes practicing professionals in the industry to identify essential skills for technicians. Those skills were the basis for the curriculum developed. In consultation with the industry leaders, the curriculum was developed that provides students, upon completion of the degree program, with the desired technical skills.

In order to measure student learning, information will be gathered in the form of student surveys regarding their satisfaction in reaching stated course objectives for each broadcasting video/audio course as it is completed.

One formative evaluation procedure will consist of utilizing the applicable College assessment tool. This process will evaluate student perceptions on the value of each course as they proceed toward their goal of a degree. The assessment tool assesses student viewpoints in the following areas: course content, instructor competency, understanding of major course content/principles, and the overall course.

Further, a cumulative examination will be given at the completion of the first year’s courses to evaluate the students’ progress. These exams will be co-written by SLCC broadcasting faculty and industry instructors, and will utilize DACUM criteria as the base measurement.

One of the most valuable aspects of formative assessment will occur when instructors relay to students their performance as intern technicians. SLCC faculty will assess student potential as entry- level broadcasting technicians. This feedback will be constructive, consistent, and immediate, thereby optimizing the value to the student to improve his/her candidacy for a position in the television or video industry. Therefore, every section of hands-on training courses will be accompanied by specific formal

13 Tab B, Page 14 of 30

evaluations to assess relevant student competencies and work characteristics. The instructors will complete an evaluation for each student.

In addition, each student video/audio project completed will be added to the student’s portfolio. These evaluations and portfolios will serve as an on-going, cumulative record of students’ progress. The evaluations and completed broadcasting, video, and audio projects will help instructors to plan the studio and classroom environment not only to facilitate learning, but also to meet the learning needs of individuals. In addition, all courses will emphasize other formative assessment approaches such as regular in-class hands-on practice problems, homework, graded quizzes, and evaluation of student projects.

Summative evaluations will occur when SLCC students are placed as interns at local television, radio, and broadcast production firms. The College lead faculty/coordinator will work jointly with supervisors at these firms to assess both the breadth and depth of student ability to apply skills to the professional work environment.

Continued Quality Improvement Feedback to SLCC Broadcast Video/Audio Production faculty from the college assessment tools will occur at the conclusion of each term. The Division Chair to which broadcast training is assigned will meet with each faculty member to review these course evaluations. However, the key element for student assessment data will be formal, written evaluations provided by employers assessing student performance during intern experiences. These comments on student and program strengths/weaknesses will be used to improve the program.

In addition, the PAC will consist of members of broadcasting companies who will host student interns. These key advisory members will provide feedback at committee meetings on the satisfaction level of their firms with SLCC students in training. The SLCC PAC will also survey employers after graduates have been with firms for one year to determine strengths and weaknesses of the SLCC training program.

14 Tab B, Page 15 of 30

SECTION V: Finance Budget1 Academic Year: 2004-04 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 Salaries Adjuncts 12,150 12,515 12,890 13,277 13,675 Technicians 10,609 10,927 11,255

Benefits Adjuncts 1,215 1,252 1,289 1,328 4,040 Technician 1,061 1,093 1,126 Current Expense 18,500 23,055 23,746 24,459 25,192 Department Travel In-State 500 515 530 546 563 Out-of-State 2,400 2,472 2,546 2,623 2,701 Program Equipment Television 120,000 105,000 60,000 115,000 97,000 (includes computers) Radio 23,400 20,000 15,000 15,000 10,000 Learning Resources 2,110 400 412 424 437 Library/Audio/Visual 4,500 2,600 2,678 2,758 2,841 (includes Satellite TV feeds into SMC of about $1000/year) TOTAL 184,775 167,809 130,761 187,435 166,158

Funding Sources The majority of this proposed program is self-supporting. Minimum anticipated revenues for 2004-2005 are:

Sponsorships/Partnerships $80,000 Student Fees $40,000 Advertising Revenue $30,000 $150,000

Additionally, the Communication, Arts, and Digital Media Division received $102,000, part of a larger congressionally-directed grant received by SLCC due to the efforts of Senator Bennett, that was used to purchase cameras, computers, software, and lighting and sound equipment. Two separate and distinct programs, from two separate and distinct departments, share this equipment, thus saving SLCC budget dollars.

The anticipated market growth would also increase anticipated revenues each year. Such market growth could result in needed additional faculty. That need has not been included on the above budget information chart as it is anticipated that any additional faculty would initially be funded from

1 Inflation factored at 3%.

15 Tab B, Page 16 of 30

revenue dollars until internal budgets stabilize and provide funding. This program is supported by administration within the College as a competitive program that would compete for new faculty position dollars in the usual allotment prioritization process.

Approval of this program would enable some of the Communication classes required specifically for this degree to receive CTE designation, thus potentially increasing CTE dollars received, adding to the SLCC budget.

Impact on Existing Budgets Due to the long-term status of this proposed program, budgets have been built anticipating the program’s approval and subsequent delivery. Funds indicated over and above the anticipated minimum revenues are included in current internal departmental budgets, as the Communication department (as well as the institution) is very committed to the successful implementation of this program for students. Therefore, immediate funding is available for the implementation of the approved program.

16 Tab B, Page 17 of 30

Appendix A: Program Curriculum New Courses to be Added in the Next Five Years None; all courses are currently existing in the Communication Department.

All Program Courses General Education Credit Prefix Course Number Course Title/Distribution Area Hours ENGL 1010 Introduction to Writing 3 MATH 1030 Quantitative Reasoning 3 COM 1010 Elements of Effective Communication 3 Human Relations HR Elective 3 Choose an additional six credit hours from at least two of the following distribution 6 areas Biological Science 3 Fine Arts 3 Humanities 3 Interdisciplinary 3 Physical Science 3 Social Science 3 General Education Total 18

Core Courses Prefix Course Number Course Title Credit Hours COM 1010 Elements of Effective Communication 3 COM 1200 Principles of Public Speaking 3 COM 1250 Broadcast Performance & Interpretation 3 COM 1500 Introduction to Mass Communication 3 COM 1510 Introduction to Broadcast Production 4 COM 1511 Broadcast Production Lab 1 COM 1800 Digital Media Essentials 4 COM 2000 Communication CO-OP/Internship 1-6 COM 2500 Elements and Issues of Digital Media 4 COM 2520 Telecom Web Prod/Performance 2 COM 2521 Telecom Web Prod/Performance Lab 1 COM 2560 Introduction to Visual Communication 4 COM 2590 Media Management and Sales 3 COM 2900 Second Year Production Project 3 COM ** Elective if applicable 0-9

**The number of internship hours determines the number of hours students have available for electives to meet AAS credit hour requirements (63-69 total). Other electives may be selected with COM department approval.

17 Tab B, Page 18 of 30

Select One of the Following Specialization Areas Audio Specialization Prefix Course Number Course Title Credit Hours COM 1530 Radio Production 2 COM 1531 Radio Production Lab 1 COM 2530 Radio Performance 1 COM 2531 Radio Performance Lab 2

Video Specialization Prefix Course Number Course Title Credit Hours COM 2310 Intermediate Video Production 3 COM 2311 Intermediate Video Production Lab 1 COM 2510 Advanced Video Production 3 COM 2511 Advanced Video Production Lab 1

Elective Courses Choose according to special interests and as schedule permits.

Prefix Course Number Course Title Credit Hours COM 1050 Elements of Human Communication 3 COM 1120 Small Group Communication 3 COM 1600 Reporting for the Mass Media 4 COM 1610 Journalism I – Reporting & Writing 3 COM 1620 Journalism II – Editing 3 COM 1630 Journalism III – Layout & Design 3 COM 2110 Interpersonal Communication 3 COM 2130 Principles of Interviewing 3 COM 2150 Intercultural Communication 3 COM 2170 Organizational Communication 3 COM 2550 Introduction to Public Relations 3

Other electives may be selected with prior COM department approval. Among disciplines with applicable electives are: Writing, Acting, Dance, Music, Business, Web Development, Visual Art & Design, Animation, Production Art, Photography, Image Editing, Personal Finance, Art History, Theater, and Multimedia Authoring.

Course Descriptions Required Courses COM 1010 Elements of Effective Communication 3 Cr Hr Listening, verbal and nonverbal messages, negotiation conflict management, and diversity in workplace and interpersonal settings. Communication theory and practice applied in small group. Writing, and electronic and verbal presentation assignments.

18 Tab B, Page 19 of 30

COM 1200 Principles of Public Speaking 3 Cr Hr Places emphasis on the dual role of speech as both a speaking and listening skill. Practice is provided through individual speeches with emphasis on organization and delivery. Electronic and verbal presentations are delivered.

COM 1250 Broadcast Performance and Interpretation 3 Cr Hr This course integrates the theory and practice of performance studies as applied in broadcast and other communication settings. Provides experience and training in voice, articulation, pronunciation, breathing, interpretation, general appearance, and presentation.

COM 1500 Introduction to Mass Communication 3 Cr Hr Introductory survey course of the field of mass communication in America. Course will preview the function, performance and structure of individual mass media and the relationships between the media and audiences and the media and government.

COM 1510 Introduction to Broadcast Production 4 Cr Hr Prerequisite: Concurrent with COM 1511. Provides development of basic performance and production skills for television, using individual and group assignments.

COM 1511 Broadcast Production Lab 1 Cr Hr Prerequisite: Concurrent with COM 1510. The lab provides the hands-on component to the study of television production, using the student television studio facility.

COM 1530 Radio Production 2 Cr Hr Prerequisite: concurrent with COM 1531. This course provides instruction and experience in the production of audio programs for radio, including the history, career opportunities, issues, and techniques of radio. The student radio station provides daily student participation.

COM 1531 Radio Production Lab 1 Cr Hr Prerequisite: Concurrent with COM 1530. This is the lab portion of the Radio Production class. Students will use the radio lab facilities to complete audio projects and/or to do on-air work on the student radio station.

COM 1800 Digital Media Essentials 4 Cr Hr Discussion of the state of the current multimedia market and introduction to new media design, development, and delivery. The history of interactive computing systems is addressed to help build understanding of context. An exposure to a variety of software applications is included.

COM 2000 Communication CO-OP/Internship 1-6 Cr Hr Prerequisite: Department approval. Supervised work experience in a business, industrial or government environment related to the student’s communication program sequence. Credit is awarded for successful completion of specific learning objectives that provide new learning related to the job and to the program sequence.

19 Tab B, Page 20 of 30

COM 2310 Intermediate Video Production 3 Cr Hr Prerequisite: Concurrent with COM 2311. Provides production experience for students with background in television or video production. Students work on group production projects and may also participate in a weekly new program for CCIN (Community College Information Network.)

COM 2311 Intermediate Video Production Lab 1 Cr Hr Prerequisite: Concurrent with COM 2310. This is the lab portion of the intermediate video production class. The lab provides real experience with video and audio equipment in the student television studio facility.

COM 2500 Elements and Issues of Digital Media 4 Cr Hr An introduction to digitally integrated media, including an understanding of the history, trends, devices, services, practices, and societal issues associated with the use of modern telecommunication technologies.

COM 2510 Advanced Video Production 3 Cr Hr Prerequisite: COM 1550; Concurrent with COM 2511. This class provides advanced news production experience for students who already have significant video production experience. The class produces a weekly news program for CCIN (Community College Information Network), and engages in other group video projects produced by the students.

COM 2511 Advanced Video Production Lab 1 Cr Hr Prerequisite: Com 1551; Concurrent with COM 2510. This is the lab portion of the advanced video production class. The lab provides real experience with video and audio equipment that is part of the student television studio facility.

COM 2520 Telecom Web Production 2 Cr Hr Provides basic performance and production skills for the web and other new media, applying visual communication principles to these environments using individual and group assignments.

COM 2521 Telecom Production Lab 1 Cr Hr This lab provides the hands-on component to the study of web and new media production, using the telecommunication production lab facility. Students participate in maintaining the slccglobelink.com web site for the Student Media Center.

COM 2530 Radio Performance 1 Cr Hr Prerequisite: Concurrent with Com 2531. This advanced radio performance class provides advanced experience for students who already have some radio production experience. Students are regular participants in the daily broadcasts of the student radio station.

COM 2531 Radio Performance Lab 2 Cr Hr Prerequisite: Concurrent with COM 2530. This is the lab portion of the radio performance class. The lab provides real experience on the air at the student radio station and in the audio lab.

20 Tab B, Page 21 of 30

COM 2560 Introduction to Visual Communication 4 Cr Hr Visual communication as manifested in photography, television, motion pictures, the Internet and other visual media. Basic principles of composition, pictorial continuity and editing that are in visual media are included.

COM 2590 Media Management and Sales 3 Cr Hr This course introduces managerial and sales principles affecting telecommunication facility operations: fiscal management, regulations, ratings, program decision-making, and maximizing human resources in a modern broadcast or telecommunication facility environment.

COM 2900 Second Year Production Project 3 Cr Hr Students design and produce a significant “capstone” video or audio production project, incorporating elements related to their specific interests or specialties, and demonstrating a mastery of the competencies and skills related to those specialties. Students must complete a project exam and make a presentation of their work. This project will result in a produced program or project that will demonstrate competencies of use to a potential future employer.

ENGL 1010 Introduction to Writing 3 Cr Hr Students will develop critical literacies – reading, writing and thinking – using various methods of knowledge making, including personal, collaborative, visual and textual methods. This course will attempt to promote awareness of rhetorical strategies as they apply to a variety of socio-cultural contexts.

MATH 1030 Quantitative Reasoning 3 Cr Hr The course focuses on the development of analytical problem-solving skills through the application of various mathematical concepts to real-life problems. Topics include modeling with algebra; geometry; logic; financial math; right triangle trigonometry and probability and statistics.

Elective Courses COM 1050 Elements of Human Communication 3 Cr Hr Survey of the basic issues, theories and perspectives in the study of human communication, through critical analysis of oral, written and audio-visual texts.

COM 1120 Small Group Communication 3 Cr Hr This course introduces the basic elements of the small group process with particular focus on problem- solving and decision-making techniques. Students’ skills of participation and analysis in decision- making are developed.

COM 1600 Reporting for Mass Media 4 Cr Hr Prerequisite: ENGL 1010. This course teaches organization and written presentation of facts to a mass audience, with emphasis on reporting and writing news. Development of information-gathering skills for presentation through mass media is fostered.

21 Tab B, Page 22 of 30

COM 1610 Journalism I – Reporting/Writing 3 Cr Hr Prerequisite: ENGL 1010. This is a basic survey course in journalism, emphasizing fact finding and news writing, including investigative reporting on specific beats. Members of the class contribute to the student newspaper and/or to student TV news (CCIN.)

COM 1620 Journalism II - Editing 3 Cr Hr Prerequisite: COM 1610. Students study in-depth reporting, focusing on the rules of correct news writing, Copyediting, interpretive and editorial writing, and reporting on a deadline. Members of the class contribute to the student newspaper and/or to student TV news (CCIN.)

COM 1630 Journalism III – Layout and Design 3 Cr Hr Prerequisite: COM 1610. Students study advanced news writing and overall layout and design of a newspaper and/or newscast, using contemporary tools for those tasks. Class members may also contribute to the student newspaper and/or to student TV news (CCIN.)

COM 2110 Interpersonal Communication 3 Cr Hr This course studies the development of students’ skills of listening, situational analysis and participation in various interpersonal contents through focus on the elements and processes, which contribute to formation, maintenance, and termination of relationships.

COM 2130 Principles of Interviewing 3 Cr Hr Students will learn interviewing methods with emphasis on interview design and questioning techniques in business, professional, and journalistic environments.

COM 2150 Intercultural Communication 3 Cr Hr The curriculum provides an examination of how cultural similarities and differences impede or enhance communication across cultures. A number of issues of diversity are considered including perception, language, values, norms and patterns of thought among populations of different cultures, such as ethnicity, gender, age, or other group affiliations. Focus is on practical application of theories of interpersonal, intergroup, and mass communication in intercultural contexts.

COM 2170 Organizational Communication 3 Cr Hr This course is an introduction to the various perspectives on organizational communication, as manifested in the theories, principles, and practices, which predominate, in modern organizations.

COM 2550 Introduction to Public Relations 3 Cr Hr This course is a survey of the public relations profession, its tools, publics, principles and its practices. The class includes a lab component where students are expected to produce public relations documents under a time deadline.

22 Tab B, Page 23 of 30

Appendix B: Program Schedule A suggested class schedule, by term, showing completion of the program in four semesters, including prefix, number, title, and semester hours:

First Year Course Credit Semester Prefix Number Course Title Hours Prerequisite First COM 1010 Elements of Effective 3 Communication COM 1250 Broadcast Performance and 3 Interpretation COM 1510 Introduction to Broadcast 4 w/Com 1511 Production COM 1511 Broadcast Production Lab 1 w/Com 1510 COM 1800 Digital Media Essentials 4 ENGL 1010 Introduction to Writing 3 Placement Test Semester Total 18 Second COM 1200 Principles of Public 3 Speaking COM 1500 Introduction to Mass 3 Communication COM 2560 Introduction to Visual 4 Communication Distribution Elective 3 Second: Audio COM 1530 Radio Production 2 w/COM 1531 Specialization COM 1531 Radio Production Lab 1 w/COM 1530 Second: Video COM 2310 Interm. Video Production 3 COM 1510, Specialization w/COM 2311 COM 2311 Interm. Video Product. Lab 1 COM 1511, w/COM 2310 Semester Total 16-17

Second Year Course Credit Semester Prefix Number Course Title Hours Prerequisite Third COM 2500 Elements & Issues of 4 Digital Media COM 2520 Telecom Web Production 2 COM 2521 Telecom Production Lab 1 MATH 1030 Quantitative Reasoning 3 Placement Test Distribution Elective 3 Third: Audio COM 2530 Radio Production 1 COM 1530 Specialization

23 Tab B, Page 24 of 30

COM 2531 Radio Production Lab 2 COM 1531 Third: Video COM 2510 Adv. Video Production 3 COM 2310 Specialization COM 2511 Adv. Video Production 1 COM 2311 Lab Semester Total 16-17 Fourth COM 2000 Internship 1-6 COM 2590 Media Management & 3 Sales COM 2900 Second Year Production 3 COM 2510/11 or Project 2530/31 Human Relations Elective 3 COM Elective(s) (if 0-9 applicable***) Semester Total 13-15 ***Number of internship hours determines the number of hours students have available for electives to meet AAS credit hour requirements (63-69 total.)

24 Tab B, Page 25 of 30

Appendix C: Faculty Dr. Randal Chase, Associate Professor, Communication Department Ph.D. Communication, University of Utah, 1997 M.S. Communication, University of Utah, 1991 B.S. Mass Communication, University of Utah, 1987 President, CEO, Chase Consulting Executive Producer, Youth Talk, KCPX-FM, Salt Lake City Executive Vice-President, Phoenix Systems, Salt Lake City Program Director, KSL-FM Radio, Salt Lake City

Art Kanehara, Assistant Professor, Communication Department M.S. Mass Communication, University of Utah, 1993 B.S. Mass Communication, University of Utah, 1989

Sheila Walcott Chambers, Associate Professor, Visual Art & Design M.F.A. Visual Art, Marywood University, 1998 B.A. Instruction Communications, California State University Long Beach, 1981 Graphic Designer, California State University, Long Beach Graphic Artist, Statewide Nursing Program, Long Beach

25 Tab B, Page 26 of 30

Appendix D Labor Market Survey This Labor Market Survey was performed statewide in July of 2001 in preparation for the initial proposal presented in 2002. Because it combined the terms “Film/Video” it is necessary to understand that “Film” generally refers to cinema or movies which may or may not be shot on celluloid film. (There are starting to be feature films shot in digital format.) “Video” generally indicates Broadcast television programs which may have segments shot on real film rather than video tape or digital tape. The difference between these two forms deals with their purpose, production methods, and content, not what medium is used for recordation. Current communication with industry leaders indicate that the information contained in the survey is still applicable to the Broadcast industry and is indicative of skills needed.

The following information was gathered from two hundred surveys, which were mailed out to Utah companies.

Labor Market Demand – State Wide Survey 1. If trained Film/Video graduates were available for hiring, would your facility do so? Yes – 26 No – 20 Maybe – 3

2. Do you feel there is presently a shortage of trained Film/Video technicians? Yes – 25 No – 20

List job title in areas for which you need Part-time Salary trained help Full-time Salary Range Range Camera operators/photographers* $250 daily $175 daily ($20-50k yearly) Editing bay operators Trained editors* $60-90 hourly Set dressing/swing gang $125-200 daily Props purchasing $125-175 daily Art Dept. Coordinator* $100-200 daily Art Director $50-70k yearly Boom operator $20-30k yearly Audio assistant* $200-500 daily $14-15k yearly ($25-30k yearly) Utility/grip* $125-300 daily VTR operators $250-300 daily Video editors—non-linear* $22-35k yearly $10 hourly Camera assistant* $200-400 daily $15 hourly ($25k yearly) Productions* $100-400 daily Video editors $200 daily ($25k yearly) Sound mixers* $275 daily

26 Tab B, Page 27 of 30

List job title in areas for which you need Part-time Salary trained help Full-time Salary Range Range Cinematographers $1,200 daily Directors & assistants $65-100 hourly Actors $50-75 hourly Script supervisors $20 hourly Graphics editor $12-25 hourly Script writers* $400+ daily Special effects* $50-100 hourly Set designers $150-250 daily *Indicates that more than one respondent listed this job title. Note: While many salaries were listed in the Full Time column on the surveys, most respondents indicated that most of the work is either part- time or contract.

3. How many Film/Video technicians do you currently have? Average Number – 2.8 Both the highest number listed (25) and the lowest number (0) were not averaged in.

4. If trained Film Video technicians were available for hire, how many additional trained techs would you need? Approximate Number – 2.0 (average) Do you use help for: full-time – 7 Part-time – 14 Contract – 23

5. Would there be additional employee benefits for full-time personnel? What types? Health – 10 Dental – 4 401K – 4 Profit Share – 1 Retirement – 1 Paid Vacation – 1

6. Would non-credit classes or workshops be of value to your employees? If so, what kind? Yes – 28 No – 12

All skill areas Digital editing Post production (editing, SPFX, sound mixing, etc.)* Writing Film theory & criticism Being an independent contractor Latest technology information* Camera operation Editing training using latest equipment* Set design & Construction On site training—seminars Business oriented subjects Computer graphics Wave monitors, vector scopes, color theory

*Indicates that more than one respondent listed that subject area.

27 Tab B, Page 28 of 30

7. Comments: Sample respondent comments are as follows: a. There is a definite need for film and television training, especially editing and post production. b. We need more people who can move heavy props and install lighting, drapes, re-wire lamps, and be CREATIVE. c. We are always looking for individuals with a strong desire to learn and be a part of live television production for internships. d. I would not be able to add personnel, just replace the ones I lose through attrition. e. Am interested in guest lecturing/teaching; 20 years experience in the business, B.A. Yale, M.A. UW at Madison, MFA at UCLA. f. I like the idea of an alternate choice to the U of U. g. I am a one-man show. h. I would like to be involved in training. i. We get many resumes but technical know how is limited. Classes should include a great deal of practical application & a full production so students can see the entire picture of production. j. Try to get classes at your school. k. Supply and demand contract/free lance market. Tough business where only a few extraordinary people survive. l. Commercials require extra people—they must have 10-20 years experience or else be “really” good. This town can support only so many “freelancers”—the need is small here but growing. There will always be a place for trained people, but they must be willing to work—10 hrs + a day and carry up to 70 pounds up mountains, risk life and limb—travel. m. People in these fields do their own production. n. We get lots of calls from people looking for work. o. Classes should be taught with professional film people—we need people who know what they are doing. p. We end up training people without any film/video background to do what we need. No school we know of, trains people for what we need. The era of the large productions house is nearly gone. With only a few exceptions here in Salt Lake nearly all of the postproduction is done at small independent companies. These smaller businesses are usually owner operated and do not have full time employees but hire contract employees as needed. The majority of people that make a living in film/video productions do so on a freelance basis. Television stations will continue to hire employees to operate a broadcast facility, but most production companies are small and staffed very lean.

28 Tab B, Page 29 of 30

Appendix E: Letters of Support from Industry Leaders are on file in the Commissioners Office Bruce Lindsey, KSL TV News Anchor/Intern Coordinator Doug Wright, KSL Radio G. Craig Hanson, President, Simmons Media

29 Tab B, Page 30 of 30

Appendix F: Student Media Center at SLCC The SLCC Student Media Center (SMC) is a facility housing production studios for all the various student media. The SMC is a cooperative effort among all elements of the College community regarding all student publications: 1) The Globe, student print newspaper, 2) Globe Link, student electronic newspaper, 3) Globe Television, the student television production studio, 4) Globe Radio, the student radio production studio, 5) Folio, the student literary magazine, and 6) the Student Film Production Studio. The SMC and its publications are open to all students, not just English or communication majors. Any SLCC student may contribute; students are not required to be Globe media staff members, sign up for a class, or make long-term time commitments to take part.

These studios are laboratories in which students produce real-life media under the direction of student editors and producers. Shadow leadership is provided from faculty advisors and local professional media advisors. Everything is produced and directed by students. A recent update is that the TV and Radio media groups now each have a full contingent of Student Broadcast Directors. Also, the International Director is now called the Diversity Director and is responsible for diversity programming such as Spanish News Broadcasts. Diversity editors have also been added to each of the student media groups.

The Student Media Council was established by the SLCC Cabinet on April 12, 2001. The Council reviews and approves procedures concerning the structure and economic operations of each media publication. The media editors are directly responsible to the Council. The Council is a standing committee of the College appointed by and accountable to the SLCC Cabinet, with the primary responsibility to represent the constituent elements of the College community with respect to the student publications, including drafting and amending guidelines such as a journalistic Code of Ethics and the responsibilities of each of the student editors and producers.

The SMC provides resources and production opportunities for students with SLCC media as well as external media, including Valley Television (Channel 17) and KULC (Channel 9). Channel 17 is a 24/7cable channel on Comcast Cable. As such, it can potentially reach 500,000 persons. Channel 9 is the Utah Education Network through which distance-delivered courses are provided to students across the state. The Globe student newspaper is published twice weekly with a circulation approaching 6,000 per week. Globe Radio is 24/7 on the Internet. Its most popular feature is its play-by-play of SLCC’s Bruin sports. Because it is Internet-based, parents of SLCC athletes who live elsewhere in the world can tune in and hear their athlete’s games on Globe Radio. Globe TV has regular broadcasts of Bruin sports, in addition to a whole host of other entertainment, news, and diversity programming. Some of this programming appears regularly on KULC, Channel 9, and Channel 17.

The SLCC SMC received the Western States Communication Association Model Teaching Program Award in 2001. The SMC affords students exceptional opportunities in preparation for their careers.

30 Tab C, Page 1 of 25

Memorandum January 5, 2005

TO: State Board of Regents

FROM: Richard E. Kendell

SUBJECT: Salt Lake Community College request to establish a new Associate of Applied Science in Film Production Technician B Action Item

Issue Officials at Salt Lake Community College (SLCC) request approval to offer an Associate of Applied Science (AAS) in Film Production Technician, starting Summer Semester 2005. This program was originally approved by the Institutional Board of Trustees on March 13, 2002, and a revised proposal was approved on February 12, 2003.

Background The Film Production Technician AAS degree program provides students with specialized knowledge required to perform the wide variety of tasks encountered in professional film production, including video production and post-production. The proposed program offers students technical foundations for careers in the film industry.

Students will master skills required to be competitive for technical positions included in Utah’s film industry, such as camera operator, audio operator, floor director, video/film editor, art director, sound recordist, lighting technician, special effects and motion graphic artist, or production assistant. Students will have the opportunity to produce real-world content in the SLCC Student Media Center (SMC). Production studios have been built for the SMC that will be utilized by the Film Production Technician students.

The proposed program will involve students with full-time faculty as well as expert film industry professionals who teach courses within their areas of expertise part-time. The local film industry is supportive of efforts to train students in these technical areas and will provide internship opportunities for SLCC students.

Tab C, Page 2 of 25

The program will emphasize meeting the needs of non-traditional students (via night classes), providing technological and vocational training, and promoting economic development for the state, all of which are part of SLCC’s mission and goals. The emphasis of coordinating and jointly developing technical training programs for high school students also helps in part to fulfill the community role played by SLCC.

Funds for the operation of this program are included in current internal departmental budgets, as the department is very committed to the successful implementation of this program for students. Potential donations are anticipated based on the strong industry support for this program.

Other budgetary funding for this program has been identified and has been set aside by the College because of reconfiguration, consolidation, and inactivation of other instructional programs of study. Approval of this program would enable some of the Film classes required specifically for this degree to receive a CTE designation, thus potentially increasing the dollars received for such courses, adding to the SLCC budget.

Policy Issues The institutional Board of Trustees has approved this proposal. The proposed AAS in Film production was initially submitted just prior to the moratorium. At that time several USHE institutions had concerns about the proposal. In subsequent meetings between these institutions and officials at SLCC, these questions and concerns have been addressed. At this time, no USHE institution expressed opposition to this proposal.

Commissioner’s Recommendation The Commissioner recommends that the Regents approve the Request from Salt Lake Community College to offer an Associate of Applied Science degree in Film Production Technician, effective Summer Semester, 2005.

Richard E. Kendell, Commissioner

REK/GW Attachment

2 Tab C, Page 3 of 25

Academic, Applied Technology and Student Success Committee Action Item

Request to Offer an Associate of Applied Science Degree in Film Production Technician Beginning Summer 2005

Salt Lake Community College

Prepared for Richard E. Kendell By Gary Wixom Andrea Worthen

January 5, 2005 Tab C, Page 4 of 25

SECTION I: The Request Salt Lake Community College (SLCC) requests approval to offer an Associated of Applied Science in Film Production Technician Degree effective Summer, 2005. This program was originally approved by the Institutional Board of Trustees on March 13, 2002, and a revised proposal on February 12, 2003. Following the lifting of the Regents’ program moratorium and in compliance with the revised R401, the letter of intent was presented to the SLCC Board of Trustees on November 10, 2004, and then submitted to the Program Review Committee. Following approval by the Program Review Committee, SLCC presents this updated program proposal.

SECTION II: Program Description The Film Production Technician AAS degree program provides students with specialized knowledge required to perform the wide variety of tasks encountered in professional film production, including video production and post-production. The proposed program offers students technical foundations for careers in the film industry.

Existing film courses taught at SLCC are in the Fine Arts Department. This Associate of Applied Science degree will thus be administered by the Fine Arts department, in the Division of Arts, Communication, and Digital Media, which resides in the School of Continuing and Community Education, Arts, Communication, and Digital Media.

Purpose of Degree The purpose of the SLCC’s Film Production Technician AAS degree is to fulfill industry request and student demand. The proposed degree responds to a current and predicted future need for a trained technical workforce in the local film industry. Currently there are no community college Film Production Technician training programs in Utah designed to provide students with a functional set of technical skills meeting industry’s needs. The proposed degree will enhance state economic development by promoting and supporting an industry that has provided one billion dollars in production work to Utah in the last decade. The proposed degree is also being offered to meet increasing student interest in digital and technical skill areas.

4 Tab C, Page 5 of 25

Expected program outcomes include a highly trained workforce and meeting the needs of industry for a trained workforce. Providing the trained workforce in turn will draw the attention of national film companies as they decide whether to shoot projects in Utah and help fill corporate needs in digital media production processes. The proposed degree will promote coordination and resource sharing with public education in the Salt Lake valley.

Institutional Readiness The proposed Film Production Technician program AAS is eagerly anticipated. Existing administrative structures recently reorganized for continuity and strengthening academic focus on teaching and learning will support the program. No new administrative or staff positions are needed. The program will be classified as vocational and lower division.

Faculty The existing Film courses at SLCC are offered by the Fine Arts department (made of up Dance, Film, Fine Arts, Theater, and Music). The Fine Arts department currently has six full-time faculty members. A full-time faculty position has been earmarked and funds reserved for the Film Production Technician AAS degree program, which will be filled upon program approval. That is the full-time position noted in Year 1 below. (See Appendix C)

Full-Time Instructor Adjunct Faculty Year 1: 2005-06 1 2 Year 2: 2006-07 0 2 Year 3: 2007-08 0 0 Year 4: 2008-09 0 0 Year 5: 2009-10 0 0

To keep current with the profession, SLCC’s faculty will annually attend a nationally recognized training program/conference.

Staff This program is supported and will be administered by the Division of Arts, Communication, and Digital Media. No additional administrative or secretarial/clerical help will be required.

Library and Information Resources SLCC Library holdings to support the Film Production Technician Program will include:

Electronic Databases. Access is available to several electronic databases from EBSCOHost and the International Index to the Performing Arts, which index, abstract, and in many instances provide full text articles to support this program. Full-text electronic articles are accessible from these journals: African American Review; American Cinematographer; American Theatre; Back Stage; Box

5 Tab C, Page 6 of 25

Office; Canadian Journal of Film Studies; Cantrill’s Filmnotes; Cineaste; Cinema Journal; Classic Images; Daily Variety; Drama Review; Electronic Media; Elle; English Language Notes; Entertainment Weekly; Essence; Film Comment; Film Journal International; Film Quarterly; Filmaker; Films in Preview; Hollywood Reporter; Interview; Journal of Arts Management, Law and Society; Jump Cut; Literature Film Quarterly; Millimeter – The Magazine of Motion Picture and Television Production; Movie Maker; New Criterion; Performing Arts Entertainment in Canada; Rolling Stone; Screen; Shoot; Sight & Sound; Theatre Crafts International; Variety, Village Voice; Wide Angle; Writer and others.

Print Journals. The Library Systems collection of print journal subscriptions includes Film Comment; Premiere; Rolling Stone; Sight & Sound; Popular Photography; and Writer’s Digest. Additional journals will be added as needed.

Current Books/Periodicals. The SLCC Library System contains 346 books, 27 videos, and 4 DVDs in the following areas: films, film production, motion pictures, motion picture authorship, motion picture production, motion picture plays, motion picture editing, lighting, stage and sound effects, cinematography, editing, and other subjects related to film production. Additional materials will be ordered to build and update these collections.

Admission Requirements There are no special admission requirements for this program. Admission is consistent with general SLCC open admission procedures and guidelines.

Student Advisement Students will have the opportunity to consult with an academic advisor who specializes in advising students for this program. Students will also be able to view this program information online and, throughout their time in the program, students will be encouraged to meet with Film Production Technician faculty for further advising needs.

Justification for Number of Credits The proposed Film Production Technician Program requires 63-69 credit hours, falling within USHE guidelines.

External Review and Accreditation The following consultants were involved in the development of the proposed program:

Scott Swofford: Producer of the acclaimed Legacy and Testament films for the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints and the recently-released The Work and The Glory movie. Scott also has produced IMAX projects such as the Mysteries of Egypt and Amazon. He requested involvement from the early stages of this project and has indicated an interest in teaching community college students.

6 Tab C, Page 7 of 25

Leigh von der Esch: Executive Director, Utah Film Commission. Leigh provided early and ongoing support for this project as well as general coordination among film industry professionals in Utah. Aaron Lee Syrett: Producer Services Director, Utah Film Commission. Aaron provided guidance in construction of the statewide survey administered by SLCC. His offices also provided names and addresses of industry professionals that the college has contacted during program development efforts. Tim Nelson: Tim has extensive experience as a director, writer, and producer. He is responsible for multiple domestic and international award-winning projects. Tim assisted SLCC in refocusing on entry-level technical skills needed to succeed in the business of supporting other industry professionals. Tim has been involved with several companies, including Feature Films for Families, as well as his own Holy Cow Productions. Lance Williams: Executive Producer, American International Media, Inc, Salt Lake City, Utah. Lance has been involved in the film industry since age eight when he began working in front of cameras. He has continued to have a successful career as an actor, writer, producer, director, and currently a producer. Lance is the president of American International Media, Inc. Lance provided guidance on a variety of specific industry needs for graduates of this proposed program. Zaki Lisha: Program Coordinator, Film Department at DeAnza College in Cupertino, California. Zaki stressed the importance of training students in the use of 16mm film. This saves taxpayers considerable amounts of money, yet students still benefit from working with cellulose. He also provided guidance on the value of a sound stage and how a stage needs to be equipped. Paul Hansen: Principal, Olympus High School. Paul has met multiple times with SLCC personnel and is coordinating Olympus efforts so students may have articulated transfer into the program when approved. Frederic Lahey: Frederic teaches at the Colorado Film/Video Instructional Studio Department of the Community College of Aurora, Denver, Colorado. Frederic provided a tour of his college film facility and information on specific training needs that two-year institutions can provide in support of the film industry. Richard Dutcher: President, Zion Films, Provo, Utah. Richard describes the need in Utah for people with significant hands-on training, hence promoting a program stressing “practical, how to make it work” projects. Tip Boxell: Vice President of Development, American International Media, Inc. helped educate the writers of this proposal with appropriate film industry specific terminology and suggestions for clear articulation.

The SLCC Film Production Technician Program Advisory Committee (PAC) consists of the following participants:

Scott Swofford: Vineyard Productions, Salt Lake City, Utah Lance Williams: Executive Producer, American International Media, Inc, Salt Lake City, Utah Richard Meyer: Producer, Expedition Films, Sandy, Utah Craig Clyde: Writer/Director, Clyde Side Productions, Salt Lake City, Utah Kelly Loosli: Professor, Theatre and Media Arts, Brigham Young University, Provo, Utah Craig Stocker: Career and Technology Education Director, Granite School Distrcit, Salt Lake City, Utah Leigh Von der Esch: Executive Director, Utah Film Commission, Salt Lake City, Utah Aaron Syrett: Producer Services Manager, Utah Film Commission, Salt Lake City, Utah

7 Tab C, Page 8 of 25

Tip Boxell: Vice President of Development, American International Media, Inc., Salt Lake City, Utah

There are currently no national organizations that accredit this type of program for community colleges.

Projected Enrollment Student FTE Mean Student FTE: Faculty FTE 2004-2005 26.4 24:1 2005-2006 54.4 24:1 2006-2007 54.4 24:1 2007-2008 54.4 24:1 2008-2009 54.4 24:1

SECTION III: Need

Program Need This proposed program was initially presented to the Office of the Commissioner of Higher Education (OCHE) and USHE institutions in 2002 and was “held” by the moratorium, during which time existing courses continued to be taught, and new courses developed in collaboration with industry personnel and taught on an experimental basis. However, the program itself was not offered as a distinct option to SLCC students.

Labor Market Demand Research and a variety of reports indicate a need for well-trained technical support personnel in the film industry. Following are particulars from the Bureau of Labor Statistics as related to the film industry.

Professional and Related Film Number in Thousand Predicted Percentage Change Production Occupations. Currently Employed 2000-2010 Multi-media artists and animators 4 75.1 Actors 25 26.0 Producers and directors 8 38.8 Writers and editors 3 34.8 Audio and video equipment technicians 7 27.5 Sound engineering technicians 3 25.8 Camera operators, video, and motion 5 49.8 picture Film and video editors 5 36.2

8 Tab C, Page 9 of 25

All other media and communication 3 36.2 equipment workers

The Utah Film Commission, an arm of the Utah Department of Community and Economic Development, has supported SLCC’s effort, guiding SLCC in completing a statewide survey in 2002 to prepare the initial proposal. Utah Film Commission’s purpose is to assist with technical production and filming needs of companies that may want to produce motion pictures, movies of the week for TV, commercials, and TV specials in Utah.

The Film Commission recognizes the importance of a trained, competent workforce. Availability of local people with fundamental film skills and hands-on experience is crucial when decisions are made by the movie industry about shooting locations. Aaron Syrett, Producer Services Executive for the Film Commission, indicates, “companies much prefer to hire locally rather than bring someone in from another state.” The proposed program also is consistent with the Governor’s effort to strengthen Utah’s position in the new economy by preparing a workforce that is digitally trained and ready to supply technological needs of industry.

SLCC has hosted meetings for many of the leading film practitioners in Utah. The most consistent theme College faculty and administrators heard during these meetings was “industry needs adequately trained personnel.” The state’s leading practitioners indicated a shortage of skilled new hires including directors, camera operators, grips (equipment movers, general assistants), electricians, editors, gaffers (lighting personnel), and video assistants.

Practicing professionals in Utah’s film industry have indicated their strong willingness to support an internship program in association with the proposed degree. This group requested that an on-the-job intern development program be implemented to increase the value-added to their industry and new hires.

The Sundance Institute, founded by Robert Redford, indicates a great need to find new ways to “enhance the artistic vitality of American film.” The Institute supports the efforts of training organizations to nurture those entering the profession. The Sundance Institute feels so strongly about the value and need for this type of training that it has offered to send well-known film artists to the College as guest instructors.

The Clark Planetarium proposes that student work produced in the College Film Production Technician program be displayed in its new Stardome as well as on a portion of the IMAX screen. This new facility will enable SLCC students to display projects to the public and receive recognition for successful projects.

Student Demand The SLCC Admissions and Academic Advisory Offices report that approximately 120 phone inquires are received each year by prospective students interested in the film areas. Current SLCC students are aware of the proposed AAS degree offering. Interest in and response to the anticipated approval of the program and the ability to register for that offering are very positive.

9 Tab C, Page 10 of 25

Similar Programs Scottsdale Community College offers a two-year associate in arts and science program with training in motion pictures and film. Many graduates have won awards for their projects.

The Higher Education and Advanced Technology Center (HEAT) in Denver also has a film program. The Community College of Aurora hosts the Colorado Film/Video Instructional Studios (CFVI), attracting students nationally and internationally. A “2 + 2” program exists between the Community College of Aurora and the University of Colorado.

Collaboration with and Impact on Other USHE Institutions The USHE’s Master Plan 2000 outlines nine major commitments to students and job training in Utah. SLCC’s proposed Film Production Technician program satisfies three of these important commitments:

Expanding opportunities for Career and Technical Education Collaborating with Public K-12 Education Promoting Economic Development through Training

Utah Valley State College (UVSC) has indicated a willingness to accept SLCC’s proposed Film Production Technician courses as applicable towards the Bachelor of Science Degree in Technology Management.

The University of Utah (UU) offers a baccalaureate program in film studies. The UU’s program is designed to increase critical thinking skills, broaden understanding of visual literacy, and foster award-winning creative work. SLCC has revised its proposed curriculum at the request of UU representatives to underscore that the Film Production Technician program focuses on technical, hands-on experience needed for film production positions.

Benefits Partnerships between the various institutions of the USHE, as well as other related groups, can help both SLCC and the USHE. For instance, the close working relationship between the Utah Film Commission and SLCC will benefit the Utah film industry, community college students, and subsequently USHE. The proposed program will provide numerous opportunities for support from federal funding agencies and financial support for local companies invested in the program through internships or employment of graduates.

The proposed program will emphasize meeting the needs of non-traditional students (via night classes), providing technological and vocational training, and promoting economic development for the state, all of which are part of SLCC’s mission and goals. The emphasis of coordinating and jointly developing technical training programs for high school students also helps in part to fulfill the community role played by SLCC.

10 Tab C, Page 11 of 25

Consistency with Institutional Mission The Film Production Technician AAS degree program is consistent with the College mission statement as is evidenced by the following:

Our Mission is Education. Salt Lake Community College is a multi-campus, comprehensive institution serving a diverse population through lifelong education. Our mission focuses on student needs in an open-door setting. We are committed to: 1. Career and Technical Education resulting in marketable job skills in a changing world. 2. General Education and pre-professional programs for transfer to other colleges and universities. 3. Adult and Continuing Education in cooperation with business and industry to enrich the opportunities of citizens. 4. Developmental Education designed to support students making a special transition to college life. 5. Community Services Education providing services and activities that promote community involvement.

Specifically, Film Production Technician is a career and technical program that will result in marketable job skills for the changing film industry; has been designed in cooperation with business and industry to enrich the opportunities of citizens; and provides services and activities that promote community involvement as well as economic development for the state.

SLCC Strategic Vision and Relationship to Institutional Strategic Goals. During the 2000- 2001 academic year, the College engaged in a series of activities to develop a strategic vision that would guide the College for the next five years. Six strategic goals were established. The Film Production Technician program directly relates to the six strategic goals as follows:

Goal 1 SLCC will be a dynamic, learning-centered college characterized by a diverse assortment of innovative learning experiences, instructional methods, and delivery systems designed to bring all members of the College community together in a culture of learning with a commitment to continuous improvement. The program will provide a combination of instruction, on-the-job training, and student- led projects. The collaboration provided within the SLCC Student Media Center (SMC) will enhance student learning and better prepare students for employment following degree completion.

Goal 2 SLCC will provide a contemporary assortment of career-oriented degree and certificate programs and credit and non-credit courses that are designed to ensure that graduates have the skills and knowledge needed to enter and advance in high-demand occupations. The program will provide training to satisfy industry demand for skilled technicians. Once the program is established, non-credit training opportunities can be added for those in the industry who wish to upgrade skills.

11 Tab C, Page 12 of 25

Goal 3 SLCC will make optimum use of technology to enhance learning and maximize the effectiveness and efficiency of College operations. Student internships with the local film industry will provide opportunities to learn first-generation film production technologies.

Goal 4 SLCC will enrich the educational experience of all learners by respecting and encouraging diversity. SLCC will provide students opportunity to focus on special programming for ethnic minorities in Utah. Students will be encouraged to learn from each other’s work.

Goal 5 SLCC will be a leader in the economic, cultural, and educational life of the greater Salt Lake and Tooele communities and will partner with other organizations to share its resources and expertise in order to fulfill its mission as the community’s college. The program will utilize local industry for on- the-job training and advisory support. The Program Advisory Committee is made up of industry leaders and support has been received for implementation of an internship program.

Goal 6 SLCC will foster a strong, positive, and consistent image as a vigorous, innovative organization that meets student, employer, community, and regional needs with an impressive assortment of contemporary programs and services. The proposed program was created at the request of industry and to meet student demand.

SECTION IV: Program and Student Assessment Program Assessment Goals for the Film Production Technician Program and SLCC measurements of success will be as follows:

# Goal Measure 1 Enroll a maximum of 24 students per year Enrollment data 2 Eighteen or more students will achieve their completion goals Student survey data annually 3 Achieve 90% job placement for those seeking employment Employment data 4 Achieve 90% level of employment satisfaction of student intern Grade data and employer work interviews 5 Include representatives from at least eight film or media firms on PAC roster the SLCC Film Production Technician PAC 6 Recruit high school Film students into the SLCC Film Production Registration data Technician Program

12 Tab C, Page 13 of 25

Expected Standards of Performance A DACUM (Developing a Curriculum) was initially held in January 2002 to assist in curriculum development. The DACUM process utilizes practicing professionals in the industry to identify essential skills for technicians. Those skills were the basis for the curriculum developed. In consultation with the industry leaders, the curriculum was developed that provides students who complete the degree program with the desired technical skills.

One measure of student learning will be student surveys regarding interest and satisfaction in reaching course objectives for each film course as it is offered. A formative evaluation procedure will consist of utilizing the applicable college assessment tool. This process will evaluate student perceptions on the value of each course as they proceed toward their degree. The assessment tool assesses student viewpoints in the following areas: course content, instructor competency, understanding of major course content/principles, and the overall course.

Further, a cumulative examination will be given at the completion of the first year of courses to evaluate student progress. The cumulative exam will be co-written by SLCC film faculty and industry instructors and will utilize DACUM criteria as the base measurement.

One of the most valuable aspects of formative assessment will be interaction between instructors and students. Faculty will give students constructive, consistent, and immediate feedback on their performance in hands-on course work, thereby optimizing student ability to improve their candidacy for a position in the film industry.

Every section of hands-on training courses will be accompanied by specific formal evaluations assessing each student’s competencies and work characteristics relevant to that section. In addition, each student project will be added to the student’s portfolio. These evaluations and portfolios will serve as an on-going, cumulative record of student progress. The evaluations and completed film projects will help instructors plan the studio and classroom environment not only to facilitate learning, but also to meet the learning needs of individuals. Additionally, all courses will emphasize other formative assessment approaches such as regular in-class hands-on practice problems, homework, graded quizzes, and evaluation of student projects.

Summative evaluations will occur when SLCC students are placed as interns at local film production firms and projects. A lead faculty/coordinator from the College will work jointly with supervisors at these firms to assess both the breadth and depth of student ability to apply skills to the professional work environment.

Continued Quality Improvement Film Production Technician teachers will receive feedback from the assessment tools after the conclusion of each term when the division chair will meet with each faculty member to review course evaluations. However, the key element for quality improvement will be formal, written evaluations provided by employers assessing student performance during intern experiences. These comments on student and program strengths and weaknesses will be used to improve the program.

13 Tab C, Page 14 of 25

Additionally, the Film Production Technician Advisory Committee will consist of representatives from companies that host interns. These key advisory members will provide feedback at committee meetings on the satisfaction level of their firms with the interns. The Program Advisory Committee also will survey employers after graduates have been with firms for one year to determine strengths and weaknesses of the SLCC training program.

SECTION V: Finance Budget Academic Year: 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 Salaries Full Time Faculty* 34,737 35,779 36,853 37,958 39,097 Adjuncts 2,550 9,300 9,579 9,866 10,162 Technician -0- -0- 10,927 11,255 11,592 Benefits Full Time Faculty* 14,589 15,027 15,478 15,942 16,420 Adjuncts 680 1,360 1,092 1,125 1,159 Technician 1,093 1,126 1,159 Current Expense 28,700 29,000 29,870 30,766 31,689 Department Travel In State 515 530 546 563 580 Out of State 1,545 1,591 1,639 1,688 1,739 Program Equipment 50,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 20,000 Learning Resources 800 824 848 874 901 Library/Audio/Visual 3,600 2,678 2,758 2,841 TOTAL 137,716 146,589 143,683 144,004 134,498 *The faculty position shown in 2004-05 (and each subsequent year) will be funded with 2004-05 Tier I funds (3% increase) and Tier II funds (8% increase) specifically earmarked by SLCC for this program. That funding has been set aside and will be used to hire a full-time faculty member who meets the criteria needed for this program of study upon program approval. There is College-wide institutional support for this program, and the faculty member position for this program competed for prioritization with all other College programs for needed faculty.

The equipment for this program is shared by another department and program, providing for efficiency in program costs. The changing technology of the film industry to a digital format has allowed these cost-saving measures to become reality.1

1 “Film,” cinema, or “movies” may or may not be shot on celluloid film. Feature films are beginning to be shot in digital format. “Film” refers to the dramatic storytelling in a film (screen) media. It is considered a theatrical piece, even when it is a “made for TV movie”; thus the term “theatrical release” for a movie. Television programs are a journalistic, magazine-style presentation of real life going on right now; mass communication (which originated in radio programming). Film is based in art and tends to have biases; news TV is a 100% communicative unbiased medium. The skills sets needed in the two arenas have similar terminology (such as lighting, location shooting, etc.) but the actual skills are separate and distinct. For example, in Film, lighting is done for effect as a part of the narrative; in news TV, lighting serves only to communicate journalistic stories in an ethical way.

14 Tab C, Page 15 of 25

Funding Sources Other budgetary funding for this program has been identified and has been set aside by the College because of reconfiguration, consolidation, and inactivation of other instructional programs of study. Approval of this program would enable some of the Film classes required specifically for this degree to receive CTE designation, thus potentially increasing the dollars received for such courses, adding to the SLCC budget.

15 Tab C, Page 16 of 25

Appendix A: Program Curriculum

New Courses to be Added in the Next Five Years None; all Film courses currently exist in the Fine Arts Department. A number of departments have worked jointly to create the proposed program; ensuring courses were not duplicated across disciplines.

All Program Courses General Education Prefix Course Number Title Credit Hours COM 1010 Elements of Effective Communication 3 ENGL 1010 Introduction to Writing 3 MATH 1010 Intermediate Algebra 4 Human Relations Elective 2-3 Distribution Area 3 Total 15-16

Core Courses Prefix Course Number Title Credit Hours ART 1310 Basic Photography 4 COM 2500 Elements and Issues of Digital Media 4 FLM 1030 Introduction to Film Technology 4 FLM 1040 Basic Production for Film Technicians 2 FLM 1041 Basic Production for Film Technicians Lab 2 FLM 1060 Camera Technology 3 FLM 1061 Camera Technology Lab 2 FLM 1800 Digital Media Essentials 4 FLM 2010 Understanding Film Direction for Technicians 2 FLM 2011 Understanding Film Direction for Technicians Lab 2 FLM 2030 Documentary and Industrial film Production 2 FLM 2040 Technical Post-Production 2 FLM 2041 Technical Post-Production Lab 2 FLM 2060 Motion Picture Sound for Technicians 3 FLM 2061 Motion Picture Sound for Technicians Lab 2 FLM 2070 Business Management & Administration for Film Production 3 FLM 2700 Advanced Physical Production for Technicians Lab 2 FLM 2701 Advanced Physical Post-Production for Technicians Lab 2 Total 47

16 Tab C, Page 17 of 25

Elective Courses Prefix Course Number Title Credit Hours FLM 1070 Film & Culture (ID) 4 FLM 1900 Independent Studies 1-2 FLM 2750 Film Production Technician Internship 3 THE 1140 Musical Theatre Performance 3 THE 1160 Technical Theatre I – Lab 3 THE 1180 Technical Theatre I – Stagecraft 3 THE 1190 Production 3 THE 2250 Make-up 3 THE 2350 Advanced Technology Make-up Prosthetics 3 THE 2520 Creative Dramatics 2

Course Descriptions Required Courses

ART 1310 Basic Photography 4 Cr Hrs The study of cameras, lighting and darkroom procedures, with emphasis on 35 mm black and white, 35 mm or medium format camera with adjustable settings and darkroom work required. Photographic films and paper also required.

COM 2500 Issues and Elements of Digital Media 4 Cr Hrs This course provides an introduction to digitally integrated media, including an understanding of the history, trends, devices, services, practices and societal issues associated with the rise and use of modern digital media technologies.

FLM 1030 Introduction to Film Technology 4 Cr Hrs An intensive workshop experience in which students, crewing in their area of specialization, complete the shooting and postproduction of projects up to 30 minutes in length. Required of all Film majors.

FLM 1040 Basic Production for Film Technicians 2 Cr Hrs Prerequisite: Concurrent with FLM 1041. A comprehensive introduction to basic film production techniques & equipment. Proper procedures explained for use of cameras, lenses, film stocks, lights, mics, tape recorders, editors, & other equipment. Required of all Film majors.

FLM 1041 Basic Production for Film Technicians Lab 2 Cr Hrs Prerequisite: Concurrent with FLM 1040. This lab course allows continued development of production projects, utilizing principles previously learned in all other film classes.

FLM 1060 Camera Technology 3 Cr Hrs Prerequisite: FLM 1040; concurrent with FLM 1061. Assignments in film and video formats focusing on black/white/color cinematography, individual projects, camera and lighting techniques in commercial, education, & dramatic films.

17 Tab C, Page 18 of 25

FLM 1061 Camera Technology Lab 2 Cr Hrs Prerequisite: FLM 1041; concurrent with FLM 1060. This lab course allows continued development of production projects, utilizing principles previously learned in all other film classes.

FLM 1800 Digital Media Essentials 4 Cr Hrs Discussion of the state of the current multimedia market & intro. to new media design, development, & delivery. History of interactive computing systems addressed to help build understanding of context. Exposure to variety of software apps.

FLM 2010 Understanding Film Direction for Technicians 2 Cr Hrs Prerequisite: FLM 1040, FLM 1060; Concurrent with FLM 2011. Emphasis on visualization of the screen play, the junction of the actor in interpreting the script, and the role of the director in handling actors during production of a film. Required of all Film majors.

FLM 2011 Understanding Film Direction for Technicians Lab 2 Cr Hrs Prerequisite: Concurrent with FLM 2010. Practice time is allowed for actual film directing, using other classmates and community members in film projects.

FLM 2030 Documentary and Industrial Film Production 2 Cr Hrs Students will crew in their area of specialization, as well as complete shooting and post-production work on projects. Required of all Film majors.

FLM 2040 Technical Post-Production 2 Cr Hrs Prerequisite: FLM 1060; concurrent with FLM 2041. Practicum in the creative & technical aspects of interactive media technology: multimedia; digital video; producing/designing for interactive TV/cinema/CD/online. Creative use of technologies for new forms of expression.

FLM 2041 Technical Post-Production Lab 2 Cr Hrs Prerequisite: FLM 1060; concurrent with FLM 2040. Practice time is provided to utilize technologies discussed in FLM 2040.

FLM 2060 Motion Picture Sound for Technicians 3 Cr Hrs Prerequisite: Concurrent with FLM 2061.Instruction in the method of recording sound with emphasis on motion pictures. Topics include: microphones, NAGRA & DAT recorders, location sound recording problems, transfer, ADR, Foley, sound effects, editing & mixing; basics of production.

FLM 2061 Motion Picture Sound for Technicians Lab 2 Cr Hrs Lab time is provided for students to experiment with various types of film-related sound equipment.

FLM 2070 Business Management & Administration for Film Production 3 Cr Hrs This course introduces students to the multiple business, administrative and management issues and practices for the performing arts. Areas include pre-production, production, post-production, insurance, liability, advertising and marketing.

18 Tab C, Page 19 of 25

FLM 2700 Advanced Physical Production for Technicians Lab 2 Cr Hrs Prerequisite: FLM 2030; concurrent with FLM 2701. With one-on-one faculty supervision, the student researches, designs, and completes his/her own final film or digital video project.

FLM 2701 Advanced Physical Post-Production for Technicians Lab 2 Cr Hrs Prerequisite: FLM 2030; concurrent with FLM 2700. Focuses on development of a comprehensive final project, utilizing best practices and principles from previous film classes.

Elective Courses FLM 1070 Film and Culture 4 Cr Hrs Intended to raise awareness through aesthetic, critical and interdisciplinary examinations of the evolution of film. Some films may be considered controversial and/or R-rated. Also listed as THE 1070.

FLM 1900 Independent Studies 1-2 Cr Hrs Students will plan their areas of study, performance and/or technical work with a full-time instructor on an individual basis.

FLM 2750 Film Production Technician Internship 3 Cr Hrs Prerequisite: FLM 2030, FLM 2040. Provides students with hands-on experience in actual work environments. Students will learn throughout their fieldwork about TV and movie sets, and actual film TV, and movie production.

THE 1140 Musical Theater Performance 3 Cr Hrs Prerequisite: Concurrent with THE 1160. Introduction to theatre production, stage design, the practicality of technical theatre and technical stage production. Set design, set construction, scene painting, budget control, and working with production staff.

THE 1160 Technical Theatre I -- Lab 3 Cr Hrs Prereq: Concurrent with THE 1180 Course provides practical backstage experience with emphasis on stagecraft.

THE 1180 Technical Theater I -- Stagecraft 3 Cr Hrs This course provides a basic introduction to stage design and technical stage production. Emphasis will be given to set design, set construction, scene painting, working within a budget and working with a production staff.

THE 1190 Production 3 Cr Hrs This course is designed to involve students as a company in production of one-act plays, reader’s theater and/or a full-length play. The course may be repeated for credit.

THE 2250 Make-up 3 Cr Hrs This course introduces the methods and materials of stage make-up. A make-up kit is required. For Film Production Technician students, the course may be adapted to include film make-up.

19 Tab C, Page 20 of 25

THE 2520 Creative Dramatics 2 Cr Hrs This course will introduce theories, concepts and methodology of creative drama as an aid to teaching all subjects. Students will develop lesson plans and carry them out in a laboratory experience with children. This course contains a service-learning component.

20 Tab C, Page 21 of 25

Appendix B: Program Schedule A suggested class schedule, by term, showing completion of the program in four semesters, including prefix, number, title, and semester hours:

First Year: First Semester Prefix Course Title Credit Prerequisite Number Hours ENGL 1010 Introduction to Writing 3 Placement Test FLM 1030 Introduction to Film Technology 4 FLM 1040 Basic Production for Film Technicians 2 w/ FLM 1041 FLM 1041 Basic Production for Film Technicians Lab 2 w/ FLM 1040 ART 1310 Basic Photography 4 Total 15

First Year: Second Semester Prefix Course Title Credit Prerequisite Number Hours MATH 1010 Intermediate Algebra 3 MATH 0970 FLM 1060 Camera Technology 3 FLM 1040, w/ FLM 1061 FLM 1061 Camera Technology Lab 2 FLM 1041, w/ FLM 1060 FLM 2010 Understanding Film Direction for Technicians 2 w/ FLM 2011 FLM 2011 Understanding Film Direction for Technicians 2 w/ FLM 2010 Lab FLM 1800 Multimedia Essentials 4 Total 16

Second Year: Third Semester Prefix Course Title Credit Prerequisite Number Hours COM 1010 Elements of Effective Communication 3 FLM 2030 Documentary & Industrial Film Production 2 FLM 2040 Technical Post-Production 2 FLM 1060, w/ FLM 2041 FLM 2041 Technical Post-Production Lab 2 FLM 1061, w/ FLM 2040 FLM 2070 Business Management & Administration for Film 3 Production General Education Distribution Elective 3 FLM/ Elective* 2-4 THE

21 Tab C, Page 22 of 25

Total 17-19

Second Year: Fourth Semester Prefix Course Title Credit Prerequisite Number Hours COM 2500 Issues & Elements of Digital Media 4 FLM 2060 Motion Picture Sound for Technicians 3 w/ FLM 2061 FLM 2061 Motion Picture Sound for Technicians Lab 2 w/ FLM 2060 FLM 2700 Advanced Physical Production for Technicians 2 FLM 2030, w/ FLM 2701 FLM 2701 Advanced Physical Production for Technicians 2 w/ FLM 2700 Lab Human Relations General Education 2-3 Requirement Total 15-16 *Film Production Internship strongly recommended.

22 Tab C, Page 23 of 25

Appendix C: Faculty Funds are currently in place (set aside) to hire a full-time faculty member for the Film Production Technician program upon approval by the Board of Regents (as noted in the Budget section). Courses have been taught (on an experimental basis) by professionals from the film industry on a part-time basis. Such individuals will continue to be utilized as adjunct faculty for program courses in cooperation with the new full-time faculty member.

Appendix D: Industry Attendees at September 2004 Meeting and/or Current Program Supporters Tip Boxell, Vice President of Development, American International Media, Inc. Craig Clyde, Writer/Director, Clyde Side Productions, Inc. Jared Hess, Writer/Director, Napoleon Dynamite Kelly Loosli, Assistant Teaching Professor, Theatre and Media Arts, Brigham Young University Richard W. Meyer, Executive Producer, Expedition Films Tim Nelson, Holy Cow Film Productions Leigh von der Esch, Executive Director, Utah Film Commission Steven Rose, Screenwriter Aaron Syrett, Producer Services Executive, Utah Film Commission Lance Williams, Executive Producer, American International Media, Inc.

23 Tab C, Page 24 of 25

Appendix E: Letters of Support from Industry Leaders are on file in the Commissioners Office Craig Clyde, Writer/Diretor, Clyde-Side Productions Inc., Sandy, Utah Leigh von der Esch, Director, and Aaron Lee Syrett, Producer Services Executive, Utah Film Commission, Salt Lake City, Utah Richard W. Meyer, Executive Producer, Expedition Films, Salt Lake City, Utah Lance C. Williams, Executive Producer/CEO, American International Media Inc., Salt Lake City, Utah

24 Tab C, Page 25 of 25

Appendix F: Student Media Center at Salt Lake Community College The SLCC Student Media Center (SMC) is a facility housing production studios for all the various student media. The SMC is a cooperative effort among all elements of the College community regarding all student publications: 1) The Globe, student print newspaper, 2) Globe Link, student electronic newspaper, 3) Globe Television, the student TV production studio, 4) Globe Radio, the student radio production studio, 5) Folio, the student literary magazine, and 6) the Student Film Production Studio. The SMC and its publications are open to all students, not just English or communication majors. Any SLCC student may contribute; students are not required to be Globe media staff members, sign up for a class, or make long-term time commitments to take part.

The SMC provides resources and production opportunities for students with SLCC media as well as external media, including Valley Television (Channel 17) and KULC (Channel 9). Channel 17 is a 24/7cable channel on Comcast Cable. As such, it can potentially reach 500,000 persons. Channel 9 is the Utah Education Network through which distance-delivered courses are provided to students across the state. The Globe student newspaper is published twice weekly with a circulation approaching 6,000 per week. Globe Radio is 24/7 on the Internet. Its most popular feature is its play- by-play of SLCC’s Bruin sports. Because it is Internet-based, parents of SLCC athletes who live elsewhere in the world can tune in and hear their athlete’s games on Globe Radio. Globe TV has regular broadcasts of Bruin sports, in addition to a whole host of other entertainment, news, and diversity programming. Some of this programming appears regularly on KULC, Channel 9, and Channel 17.

The SLCC SMC received the Western States Communication Association Model Teaching Program Award in 2001. The SMC affords students exceptional opportunities in preparation for their careers.

25 Tab D, Page 1 of 4

January 5, 2005

MEMORANDUM

TO: State Board of Regents

FROM: Richard E. Kendell

SUBJECT: Consent Calendar: Academic, Career and Technical Education, and Student Success (Programs) Committee

The following requests have been submitted for consideration by the Regents on the Consent Calendar of the Programs Committee.

A. Southern Utah University

1. Minor in Legal Studies

Request: Southern Utah University requests authorization to offer a Minor in Legal Studies in the Department of Political Science and Criminal Justice. The proposed Minor in Legal Studies will consist of courses from various disciplines including Criminal Justice, Paralegal, Political Science, Business, Communications, and Philosophy. The intent is to provide a course of study that will help prepare students for careers in the legal profession or for graduate/professional study.

Need: In recent years there has been increased student interest at SUU in attending law school. Many of these students are majors in Business, Criminal Justice, Political Science, and other disciplines. The proposed Minor would provide legitimate academic preparation for students going to law school. This proposal has been discussed with local members of the legal profession and has been met with enthusiastic support. Rumors of the new proposal have already generated student interest on campus. Moreover, the proposed program would provide a Minor for paralegal students desiring a bachelor’s degree and who want to work as legal assistants. The legal profession is very broad and comprehensive. There are many positions and career opportunities in business, industry, government, courts, law firms, consulting companies, and in private practice. A litigious society provides a strong market demand for lawyers and legal assistants.

Institutional Impact: The proposed Minor is composed of existing courses distinct from a criminal justice minor. Yet, it complements both political science and criminal justice majors. The proposed Minor focuses on foundations of law and issues in related disciplines. Further, it is a specific program incorporating courses in legal matters and other areas designed to help students succeed in professional schools and the legal professions. There is no impact on present administrative Tab D, Page 2 of 4 structures. No additional facilities or equipment will be needed, and no additional curriculum will be added unless warranted by enrollment demand.

Finances: No additional costs are anticipated since the proposed Minor is composed of existing courses. Current departmental budgets are adequate for the Minor. The Minor’s appeal may generate increased enrollment growth and improve program viability. Current faculty and resources are sufficient to implement this program.

B. Salt Lake Community College

1. Engineering Design/Drafting Technology (EDDT/ Machining Technology) Certificate of Completion

Request: Salt Lake Community College requests approval to offer EDDT/ Machining Technology Certificate of Completion effective Spring 2005. The purpose of the Certificate of Completion is to provide the training required to begin work as an entry-level machinist. Currently there is no program in the Salt Lake Valley that offers this training. Two of the most important missions at SLCC are to respond quickly to the needs of industry and provide marketable job skills for students. The demand for these skills has risen in the last two years, and data show demand will continue to increase. This program will help SLCC fulfill its responsibility to industry and provide students with marketable skills that are in high demand.

This 30-week, 30-credit hour curriculum provides students with the manual and Computer Numerical Control (CNC) skills required for work as an entry-level machinist in industry, equivalent to six months of on-the-job training. The two-semester Certificate in Machining Technology provides the student with the entry-level skills required for work as a machinist in industry and includes: manual and CNC machining, CAD (Computer Assisted Design), CAM (Computer Assisted Manufacturing), Geometric Dimensioning and Tolerancing, manufacturing processes and general education in communications, human relations and math.

Need: Machining Technology - trained machinists are continuously needed in engineering, manufacturing and fabrication companies, and there are not enough new workers available to fill the entry-level positions. Representatives from Macrotech Polyseal Inc. and Merit Medical Systems approached the college’s Corporate Training Department requesting machinist training for their current employees because they were not aware that machinist courses were provided at SLCC. A member of the faculty recently met with the employees at Macrotech Polyseal to present the Certificate of Completion in Machining Technology and the company intends to send 36 employees through the program starting Spring 2005 (pending program approval.)

Members of the Engineering Design/Drafting and Manufacturing Technology Professional Advisory Committee and other industry employers indicate that trained machinists are consistently needed in engineering, manufacturing and fabrication companies, and there are not enough new workers available to fill the entry-level positions. An article in the Salt Lake Tribune (June 21, 2004), stated, “After a four-year slump, manufacturing is on the upswing again, and employers in Utah and nationwide are desperate for machinists to fill the demand. . . . In Utah, which lost more than Tab D, Page 3 of 4

15,000 manufacturing jobs between 1998 and 2002, the number of machinist job openings is expected to increase 12 percent from 2,940 in 2000 to 3,300 in 2010, according to the Department of Labor. . . . You've got to spend a lot of money every year on upgrading the skills of your work force. When times are hard, employers often forgo this kind of investment. Then when they need a ready skilled workforce, it's not out there. There is a skills gap from the past three years that will be with us for the next five."

Institutional Impact: Salt Lake Community College already possesses the facilities, equipment, tools, funding, and qualified faculty to provide machinist‘s training for Salt Lake Valley at no additional cost or duplication of effort. All of the courses are already being taught on a regular basis as core courses in the Manufacturing Engineering Technology AS and Mechanical Engineering Technology AS (articulated with Weber State University) and the CAD\CAM Engineering Technology AS (articulated with Southern Utah University) and as elective classes in the Engineering Design\Drafting Technology AAS Degree. The classes required for this Certificate are currently taught by full-time faculty as part of their standard teaching load. Organization and supervision of the program will be accomplished by the current department coordinator and division chair.

Finances: The proposed Certificate program will have little or no fiscal impact on the existing Engineering Design/Drafting Technology Department or on the College. All of the courses are already budgeted and being taught on a regular basis for the existing AAS and AS Degree programs. Additional students seeking the Certificate will fill existing classes. When enrollment in the program grows to the point that additional sections of these classes need to be offered, there will be budget adjustments made to cover the cost of adjunct instructors to teach additional sections. SLCC does not expect or need growth funding for this Certificate offering. The cost of consumable materials used in the classes is funded through current program budgets as well as grant funds and industry donations. The classes required for this Certificate are currently taught by full-time faculty as part of their standard teaching load.

C. Utah College of Applied Technology/Ogden-Weber ATC

1. Fast Track Approval – Medical Coder Certificate of Proficiency

Request: In accordance with Regents policy R401-6 Fast Track Program Approval Procedure, UCAT/Ogden-Weber ATC submitted a Letter of Intent for approval of a new Medical Coder Certificate of Proficiency. This proposal was reviewed by the Commissioner for approval for federal financial aid eligibility. All internal requirements for review and approval have been met. The Ogden-Weber Applied Technology College Board of Directors approved this certificate on November 18, 2004.

The Medical Coder Certificate is a sub-set of the Medical Office Administration Certificate, which is 1620 hours in length. At 840 hours, the Medical Coder Certificate allows students to specialize in the coding area, complete a program in half the time, and obtain a College certificate denoting their specialty. All courses are already in place and students are enrolled. The addition of federal financial aid eligibility for this program will assist students in program completion. Tab D, Page 4 of 4

Need: Medical coding instruction has been offered as part of the Medical Assisting program since 1992. In 2003, additional courses were included in the Medical Office Administration program in response to employer requests. These classes have been in high demand, not only for students enrolled in the Medical Office Administration program, but for students whose primary occupational goal is medical coding. Forty students are enrolled in the medical coding courses. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, employment of medical coders is expected to grow much faster than the average for all occupations through 2012, due to rapid growth in the number of medical tests, treatments, and procedures that will be increasingly scrutinized by third-party payers, regulators, courts, and consumers. The fastest employment growth and a majority of the new jobs are expected in offices of physicians, due to increasing demand for detailed records, especially in large group practices. Rapid growth also is expected in nursing care facilities, home healthcare services, and outpatient care centers. Additional job openings will result from the need to replace technicians who retire or leave the occupation permanently. Institutional Impact: All courses required for the Medical Coder Certificate of Proficiency have been developed and enjoy strong enrollment. No additional physical facilities or instructional materials, beyond those that currently exist, are required to initiate this certificate. It is anticipated that program demand will increase the number of hours and locations in which coding courses are offered.

Finances: Instructors and current expenses for this certificate have already been allocated as part of the existing budget for the Medical Office Administration program. The instructor position is currently part-time and will be converted to full-time salaried over the next two years to meet enrollment demand. Since this certificate is utilizing existing courses and human resources, the budget requirements are neutral.

Commissioner’s Recommendation

The Commissioner recommends that the Regents approve the institutional requests on the Consent Calendar on the Programs Committee as described above.

Richard E. Kendell, Commissioner

REK/PCS Tab E, Page 1 of 11 USHE Majors Meetings 12 December 2004

MEMORANDUM

January 5. 2005

TO: State Board of Regents

FROM: Richard E. Kendell

SUBJECT: Majors’ Meetings and Common Course Numbers – Report

Issue

During the 2004 Legislative session, lawmakers passed H.B. 320, Transferability of Credit among Higher Education Institutions. The purpose of the Bill was to facilitate transfer for students from two-to four-year programs. The Bill required the use of common numbers for courses that were similar in content, rigor and standards. Common course prefixes were to be adopted where possible.

Background

In April, 2004, approximately 250 faculty from 25 academic disciplines met to discuss transfer and to identify courses that met the legislative requirement for common numbers. Some 418 common numbered courses, up from 35, were agreed upon by participating faculty. In many instances common course prefixes were agreed upon where academic departments share a common name.

Institutional computer course tracking systems are required to use the common numbers and prefixes by 2006, a year when new college catalogs will be published. For those institutions whose catalogs were updated for 2005, common numbers and prefixes will be used. The Commissioner’s staff held meetings with institutional computer staff to determine how the task would be accomplished given its enormity, complexity, and cost; all newly numbered courses would need to include the old numbers so that transfer students would not be disadvantaged. There was no fiscal note on the Bill.

In December, 2004, five additional academic disciplines – Business, Computer Science, Engineering, Early Childhood Education, and Special Education - and one that had met in April

Printed 01/10/2005 Page 1 of 11 Tab E, Page 2 of 11 USHE Majors Meetings 12 December 2004

2005 – Elementary Education - came together for the same purposes. Faculty in these academic disciplined agreed upon 70 courses to be commonly numbered, raising the total of common numbered courses to 488. These courses with both the old and new numbers will need to be included in every institution’s computer systems.

Future Progress

All 30 academic disciplines will reconvene in the Spring of 2005, a ritual in which they have engaged for the last six years, for the purpose of increasing the number of courses that will transfer among the nine public credit-bearing institutions. With common numbered courses far exceeding expectation, faculty from each discipline will review the common numbered courses to assure they have not changed in content, rigor and standards and to add new courses that reflect changes in their academic disciplines. More important, faculty will continue to work together to establish common learning goals for students.

Attached are the agreements of the six academic disciplines that met in December 2004.

Commissioner’s Recommendation

The Commissioner recommends that the Regents review the report and make suggestions where appropriate. No action is needed.

______Richard E. Kendell. Commissioner

REK/PCS Attachment

Printed 01/10/2005 Page 2 of 11 Tab E, Page 3 of 11 USHE Majors Meetings 12 December 2004

Business...... 3 Representatives...... 3 Notes...... 4 New Common Course Numbers...... 4 Computer Science ...... 4 Representatives...... 4 Notes...... 5 New Common Course Numbers...... 5 Early Childhood Development...... 6 Representatives...... 6 Notes...... 6 New Common Course Numbers...... 6 Elementary Education ...... 7 Representatives...... 7 Notes...... 7 New Common Course Numbers...... 7 Engineering ...... 8 Representatives...... 8 Notes...... 9 New Common Course Numbers...... 9 Special Education...... 10 Representatives...... 10 Notes...... 11 New Common Course Numbers...... 11

Business Representatives Sue Besser SLCC Paula Alger SUU Marcia LaVelle SLCC Cliff Skousen USU Eldon Bott BYU Peggy Buttars USU Henning J. Olsen CEU Ruth Harrison USU Russell Goodrich CEU Debra Scammon UU Philip Lee DSC Ed Barbanell UU Blair Carruth SLCC Mary Hasak UU Edward G. Engh SLCC Michael Aikenson UU Gary Barnett SLCC Mikki O’Connor UVSC Lorna Wells SLCC Terry Acord UVSC Melodee Lambert SLCC Bruce Hondley WSU Douglas Dyreng Snow Don Carpenter USHE

Printed 01/10/2005 Page 3 of 11 Tab E, Page 4 of 11 USHE Majors Meetings 12 December 2004

Notes Business Calculus: WSU couldn’t say whether they could/would change to 1100. Business Law: All schools agreed the title would include “business” and “law.” Foundations of Business: Only UU and SLCC require this course. UU is changing to BUS 1050. SLCC is changing the title to match. Computer Proficiency: content is changing. It needs future discussion. Business Writing: Not everyone has this class. Will be discussed in the future. CEU will change its accounting prefix to “ACCT.” It is up to the other schools to change. WSU had no representative for ACCT or STAT (in economics department). Schools that require 4 credits of Business Statistics require two 3-credit courses when transferring. Business Communications: this is unclear—Marcia’s notes say all agreed to change to 2200.

New Common Course Numbers # Generic Title UU USU WSU SUU DSC UVSC Snow CEU SLCC Foundations of BUS BA BUS BMGT BUSN Business 1050 1350 1010 1010 1310 1100 Business Calculus MATH MATH MATH MATH MATH MATH MATH 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 1100 Business Calculus QUANT BUS in Business Schools 2400 2150 2010 Financial ACCTG ACCT ACCTNG ACCT ACCT ACC ACCT BUSN ACCT Accounting 2600 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 2010 1220 2020 Managerial ACCTG ACCT ACCTNG ACCT ACCT ACC ACCT BUSN ACCT Accounting 2610 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 2020 1230 2040 Business Statistics STAT MATH STAT MATH MATH (4 credits) 2300 2040 2040 2040 2470 2050 Business Law Upper MHR Upper ACCT MGMT Upper BMGT BUSN MGT division 2990 division 2360 2060 division 2120 2090 2050 2200 Business Upper ISA MGMT BUED BUS Communications division 2300 2200 2200 2010 2340 Business Statistics I MGT QUANT MGT (3 credits) 2390 2600 2200 2350 Business Statistics MGT Upper MGT MGT II (3 credits) 2490 division 2340 2300

Computer Science Representatives Don Cooley USU Jimmy Chen SLCC Henry A. Zwick CEU Garth Sorenson Snow Curtis Larsen DSC Mike Grady SUU Barbara Grover SLCC Dave Hanscom UU Katrina Green SLCC Fred Orchard UVSC

Printed 01/10/2005 Page 4 of 11 Tab E, Page 5 of 11 USHE Majors Meetings 12 December 2004

Gordon Stokes UVSC Greg Anderson WSU Dona Bilyeu-Dittman WSU Betty Tucker WSU

Notes All labs have course numbers ending with “5” instead of “0.” Examine feasibility of having “CS” as the common pre-fix. All departments at each school present agreed to this. It will be re-examined later after looking at the course numbers. There is a concern with common languages: students need to complete a series of courses, not just individual course, for transfer. Software Engineering: concern with problems of upper division courses. Some institutions are dropping courses from upper division to lower vision. There are concerns regarding total number of upper division hours to meet the 40 minimum required. Foundations of Computer Science: USU has this as a general education physical science course option. This concept may help other institutions get approved as general education at other schools. Discrete Mathematics: will keep current with math department decisions, thus there is no CS change. All the institutions stressed the importance of completing an entire sequence at the same school for the 1400, 1410, 2420 series because not every school teaches in the same language. This group would like to have another articulation/major meeting in the spring to revisit the 1400, 1410, 2420 series in terms of language and additional course content.

New Common Course Numbers # Generic Title UU USU WSU SUU DSC UVSC Snow CEU SLCC 1030 Foundations of Computer Science 1035 Foundations of Computer Science Lab 1400 Fundamentals of CS CS CS CS CNS CS BCIS CS 1400 Programming 1700 1020 1050 1400 1250 1710 1520 BCIS 1530 1405 Fundamentals of CS CS Programming Lab 1710 1710L 1410 Object-Oriented CPSC CS CS CS CS CNS CS BCIS CS 1810 Programming 2010 1720 1220 1110 1440 1350 1720 1540 1415 Object-Oriented CS Programming Lab 1720L 2420 Introduction to CPSC CS CS CS CS CNS CS BCIS CS 1820 Algorithms & Data 2020 2200 2320 2700 2020 2400 2210 2523 Structures

Printed 01/10/2005 Page 5 of 11 Tab E, Page 6 of 11 USHE Majors Meetings 12 December 2004

# Generic Title UU USU WSU SUU DSC UVSC Snow CEU SLCC 2425 Introduction to Algorithms & Data Structures Lab 2450 Software CS CS CS CS CNS CS BCIS CS 2750 Engineering 2370 3050 4210 3370 3400 2270 2370 2455 Software Engineering Lab 2700 Digital Design CS CS 2610 3700 2705 Digital Design Lab CS 2630 2810 Computer CPSC CS CS CS CS CNS CS CS 2620 Organization & 3810 2550 2650 3500 3550 1380 2540 Architecture 2815 Computer Organization & Architecture Lab

Early Childhood Development Representatives Lynn Benson Jill Flygare UU Phil Brown CEU [email protected] [email protected] Tim Eicher DSC [email protected] Aimee Fox UU Dale Smith SLCC [email protected] [email protected] Kauli Kaio SLCC [email protected] Cheryl Wright UU Lee Montgomery SUU [email protected] [email protected] Genan Anderson UVSC Martha Dever USU [email protected] [email protected] Roz Charlesworth WSU Farol Nelson USU [email protected] [email protected] Teddi Safman USHE

Notes A compromise was reached regarding Working with Parents. WSU is keeping it as 3640 but transfers from SLCC and DSC won’t have to take it. They can substitute another upper division course. This is consistent with some of the ELED decisions.

New Common Course Numbers # Generic Title UU USU WSU SUU DSC UVSC Snow CEU SLCC 1400 Courtship and ChFam ECFS HFST Marriage 1400 1400 1400

Printed 01/10/2005 Page 6 of 11 Tab E, Page 7 of 11 USHE Majors Meetings 12 December 2004

# Generic Title UU USU WSU SUU DSC UVSC Snow CEU SLCC 1500 Human FCS FCHD ChFam ECD FCS ECFS HFST FAML FHS Development 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 1500 Across Lifespan 2400 Marriage and FCS FCHD ChFam FCS FCS ECFS HFST FAML FHS Family Relations 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2400 2500 Child Development: FCS FCHD ChFam FCS EDEC HFST FAML FHS Birth to Eight 3215 3510 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 2500 FCHD 3500 2550 CDA Completion FHS 2020 2600 Introduction to FCHD ChFam FCS EDEC HFST FAML FHS Early Childhood 2600 2600 2600 2600 2600 2600 2600 Education or 2250 2610 Guidance FCS FHD ChFam ECD FCS EDEC HFST FAML FHS 2610 2610 2610 2610 2610 2610 2610 2610 2610 ECD FCS 2610L 2610L 2620 Creative Play FCS ChFam FCS EDEC HFST FAML FHS 2620 2620 2620 2620 2620 2620 2620 2640 Working with ChFam FCS FHS Parents 2640 2640 2640

Elementary Education Representatives Phil Brown CEU [email protected] Jill Flygare UU Tim Eicher DSC [email protected] [email protected] Dale Smith SLCC [email protected] Lynne Schrum UU Kauli Kaio SLCC [email protected] [email protected] Gary Parnell Snow Linda Benson UVSC [email protected] [email protected] Judith Mitchell WSU Lee Montgomery SUU [email protected] [email protected] Roz Charlesworth WSU Aimee Fox UU [email protected] [email protected] Teddi Safman USHE

Notes UVSC is tentatively changing its Children’s Literature to a 2000-level.

New Common Course Numbers # Generic Title UU USU WSU SUU DSC UVSC Snow CEU SLCC

Printed 01/10/2005 Page 7 of 11 Tab E, Page 8 of 11 USHE Majors Meetings 12 December 2004

# Generic Title UU USU WSU SUU DSC UVSC Snow CEU SLCC 1010 Foundations of TL 2100 EDUC EDUC EDEL EDUC EDUC EDU Education 2000 2100 2500 2200 1000 2020 1500 Human FCS HFST FAML FHS Development 1500 1500 1500 1500 2010 Math for Elem. Possibly MATH MATH MATH MATH Teachers I MATH 2310 2010 2470 2010 4010 2020 Math for Elem. Possibly MATH MATH MATH MATH Teachers II MATH 2320 2020 2020 2020 4020 2110 Education EDPS Ed Psychology 2100 Psych 2110 2120 Children’s TL 2120 EDUC ENGL ENGL ENG Literature 2300 2350 2330 2720 ENG 2120 2400 Soc/ Educ.? 2610 Child Guidance FAML FHS 2610 2610 3100 ENGL 3300 3110 Education EDUC EDUC EDEL Psychology 3200 3200 3000 3120 Children’s LM EDEL Literature 3180 3150

Engineering Representatives Henry A. Zwick CEU Blair McDonald SUU Victor Hasfurther DSC Kathy Bayn USU Katrina Green SLCC Neil Cotter UU Nick M. Safaí SLCC Geoff Silcox UU Vinoo Kamdar SLCC Paul Borgmeier UU Hassan Mohsenian SLCC Nick Korevaar UU Holly Moore SLCC Larry Reaveley UU Sara Farida SLCC Gordon Stokes UVSC Barbara Grover SLCC Fred Orchard UVSC Lee Brinton SLCC John Allred WSU Jim Luster Snow Kirk Hagen WSU Garth Sorenson Snow Gary Wixom USHE

Printed 01/10/2005 Page 8 of 11 Tab E, Page 9 of 11 USHE Majors Meetings 12 December 2004

Notes Concern with maintaining ABET accreditation o Have already been working on for many years with existing articulation. Thus, look at numbering and common pre-major prefixes generic – by college, not department. o “Can of worms” with concern of realignment between departments and various issues with labs and credit hours. o Seconding of new pre-fixes and concern with renumbering as well as lack of funding vs. time and money already committed. o Many universities already have approximately 60% transfer students. Talk about cross listing of courses – concern should be with common number not pre-fix (Gary Wixom). UU trying to do so between departments with statistics and strengths with same credits for courses and then common number could follow. Proposal: Generic catalog & number, but universities could be cross-listed. Four for, none recorded against.

New Common Course Numbers # Generic Title UU USU WSU SUU DSC UVSC Snow CEU SLCC 1000 Introduction to 1000 ENGR ENGR ENGR ENGR ENGR ENGR ENGN ENGR Engineering 1010 1010 1010 1010 1000 1010 1010 1010 Introduction to ENGR ENGN 1020 Engineering Lab 1020 1020 1270 Analog Major: 1000 ENGR ENGR 1100 Circuits I 1010 2100 1275 Analog Major: ENGR Circuits I Lab 210L 2010 Statics CVEEN ENGR ENGR ENGR ENGR ENGR ENGR ENGN 1300 2110 2000 2000 2010 2000 2000 2010 2000 2020 Dynamics I 2410 2340 2030 Dynamics ME ENGR ENGR ENGR ENGR ENGR ENGR ENGN EN 2020 2020 2030 2020 2020 2020 2310 2400 2060 Dynamics II 2350 2140 Strength of CVEEN ENGR ENGR ENGR ENGR ENGR ENGR ENGN 2310 Materials 2140 2040 2040 2040 2040 2040 2040 2140 2145 Strength of ENGR 2330 Materials Lab 2050 2150 Statics & Strength ME EN of Materials 1300 2160 Materials Science 2116 2060 3010 2160 2170 Materials Science 2117 2170 ½ course 2175 Materials Science Lab

Printed 01/10/2005 Page 9 of 11 Tab E, Page 10 of 11 USHE Majors Meetings 12 December 2004

# Generic Title UU USU WSU SUU DSC UVSC Snow CEU SLCC 2200 Analog Non- 1060 1060 Majors ½ course 2205 Analog Non- Majors Lab 2210 Analog Non- 1050 ECE 1050 Majors 2200 2240 Survey & Global 2140 2240 ENGR ENGN 2030 2240 2240 2245 Survey & Global Lab 2270 Analog Major: 2000 ECE 3070 2200 ENGR ENGN 2050 Circuits 2410 2300 2410 2275 Analog Major: ECE 3080 ENGR ENGN Circuits Lab 2420 230L 2420 2280 Analog Major: 2100 2100 Fundamentals of Electricity 2300 Thermodynamics CHE 2400 ENGR ENGR ENGR 2400 ENGR ENGN 2850 I 2850 2600 3000 2400 2400 2400 ME 2600 2450 Numerical CHE ENGR ENGR 2040 Methods 2703 2200 2200 ME 2040 2650 Manufacturing 2000 2600 4060 2050 2655 Manufacturing 2010 Lab 2700 Digital Circuits 3700 ECE ENGR 2700 2530 2530 2710 Digital Circuits ECE ENGR Lab 2540 253L

Special Education Representatives Tim Eicher DSC [email protected] Teddi Safman USHE Dale Smith SLCC [email protected] Kauli Kaio SLCC [email protected] Lee Montgomery SUU [email protected] John McDonnell UU [email protected] Linda Benson UVSC [email protected] Fran Butler WSU [email protected]

Printed 01/10/2005 Page 10 of 11 Tab E, Page 11 of 11 USHE Majors Meetings 12 December 2004

Notes SLCC PED (AS) transfers well to USU and UU. Special Education group prefers meeting without other programs in the future. All 4-year institutions accept a letter of completion or AS degree for general education.

New Common Course Numbers # Generic UU USU WSU SUU DSC UVSC Snow CEU SLCC Title 2010 EDUC EDU 2900 2600

Printed 01/10/2005 Page 11 of 11 Tab F, Page 1 of 2

MEMORANDUM

January 5, 2005

TO: State Board of Regents

FROM: Richard E. Kendell

SUBJECT: Information/Discussion: USHE Programs at Correctional Facilities

Issue

The Utah System of Higher Education (USHE) provides educational services at correctional facilities across the state. Due to the nearly indigent status (prison jobs routinely pay only $.40 an hour), offenders are charged a reduced college tuition of approximately $100 a semester. Beyond the modest allocation of funds provided by the legislature through the Utah State Board of Regents, USHE institutions subsidize tuition shortfalls as well as provide all associated materials and text books. Expenses continue to rise with no increase in revenue sources, which has resulted in an increase in the subsidy necessary to keep these important programs operating. USHE institutions are having an increasingly difficult time keeping these programs operating and providing additional programs to meet the demand.

Background

Statutory Authority. 53A-1-403.5 of the Utah Code, holds the State Board of Education and the Utah State Board of Regents jointly responsible for the education of offenders in the custody of the Department of Corrections. The stated goal of this collaborative effort is to develop and implement curriculum that will enhance offenders’ success upon release.

Academic Achievement. From 1998 through 2004, USHE institutions have provided educational offerings that have resulted in offenders earning the following:

376 Career and Technical Certificates/Diplomas 244 Associate’s Degrees 24 Bachelor’s Degrees 4 Master’s Degrees Tab F, Page 2 of 2

Participant Recidivism/Employment Rates. A December 2004 study conducted by the Utah Department of Corrections found that offenders who had earned an associate’s, bachelors, or master’s degree while in prison during 1998-2003 had a 23.9% reduction in recidivism when compared to the general prison population. Subsequent independent research for that same time period found that offenders who participated in post-secondary education had an average employment rate of 88% compared to a reported 70% unemployment rate for non-participants. The connections are obvious: Career and technical training translates into better jobs; better jobs carry higher wages; higher wages mean more individual and family stability; and stability reduces recidivism.

Impact on Utah’s Economy. In May 2003, The University of Utah Department of Economics published research which found that educating offenders is a financially solid investment for Utah’s taxpayers. In particular, the research demonstrates:

The direct/victim costs of new crimes in Utah amount to over $578 million per year. Offender education programs in Utah reduce direct/victim costs of new crimes by over 28 million per year. Every $1.00 spent on offender education results in over $11.00 in direct public savings and victim costs. Expansion of offender education efforts would result in even larger dividends.

A partnership involving officials representing the Utah System of Higher Education, the Utah State Board of Education, the Department of Corrections and select legislators, has been formed to investigate sources of additional funding to support the increasing demands of the program. Regents will be kept informed as these efforts continue.

Commissioner’s Recommendation

This item is for information and discussion purposes and no action by the Regents is required.

Richard E. Kendell, Commissioner

REK/GSW

2 Tab G, Page 1 of 1

MEMORANDUM

January 5, 2005

TO: State Board of Regents

FROM: Richard E. Kendell

SUBJECT: Position Papers in Development by the USHE Chief Academic Officers - Report

Issue

Discussion held among the Commissioner’s staff and the USHE Chief Academic Officers (CAOs) revealed that certain issues impacted not only all of the USHE campuses but the system as a whole. Therefore, the CAOs elected to form subcommittees and develop position papers on these common issues. The intent of the position papers is to clarify the issues and offer strategies for addressing them. The most critical topics identified by the CAOs were: Transfer, Remediation/ Developmental Education, Concurrent Enrollment, Retention/Time to Graduation, Minorities and Disadvantaged, Technology-Driven Instruction, and Workforce Issues.

Currently, each subcommittee and the CAOs as a group are revising and editing their position papers. Once the papers are completed and vetted, they will be prepared for the Regents, Legislature, institutional faculty and staff, and interested community members. And, they will eventually become part of a more comprehensive academic plan. Also, the CAOs intend to address the issues on their own campuses in order to serve more effectively the purposes of higher education and the success of USHE students.

CAOs will provide brief descriptions of their position papers during the January 14th meeting.

Commissioner’s Recommendation

These policy papers are being prepared and brief oral reports will be presented for preliminary comment and discussion. No action is required.

Richard E. Kendell, Commissioner REK/PCS Tab H, Page 1 of 3 & Attachment(s)

January 6, 2005

MEMORANDUM

TO: State Board of Regents

FROM: Richard E. Kendell

SUBJECT: ACTION: UHEAA--Approving Resolution, SBR Student Loan Revenue Bonds, 2005 Series W and X

Issue

Board of Regents adoption of an approving resolution for the issuance of student loan revenue bonds is necessary to provide funding for the purchase and origination of student loans by UHEAA.

Background

At its meeting on December 17, 2004, the Student Finance Subcommittee voted unanimously to recommend Board of Regents adoption of the attached Approving Resolution for the Board’s Student Loan Revenue Bonds, 2005 Series W and X. Board of Regents adoption of the Resolution is necessary to provide authority for issuance and sale of the bonds.

Proposed Structure

Based upon the financing team’s review and analysis of the Program’s needs, alternative structures, pricing, and current circumstances, it is concluded that the Board would best be served by issuing a combination of taxable and tax-exempt seven-day Variable Rate Demand Obligations (VRDO’s) issued under the AMBAC insured structure of the 1988 Master Indenture.

Proposed terms are as follows: Proposed Sale Date: February 8, 2005 Proposed Closing Date: February 11, 2005

Expected Proposed Var./Fixed Tax Rating Amount Rate Maturity Status Series 2005 W AAA $ 91,085,000 Variable 11/01/39 Tax Exempt Series 2005 X AAA $ 60,000,000 Variable 11/01/44 Taxable

Total $151,085,000 State Board of Regents Tab H, Page 2 of 3 & Attachment(s) January 6, 2005 Page 2

Proposed Not To Exceed Parameters

Not To Exceed Resolution Parameter Reference ! Total Principal Amount $160,000,000 Section 5

! Principal Amount of Bonds That May Bear Variable Interest Rates $160,000,000 Section 5

! Maximum Interest Rate of Tax Exempt Variable Rate Demand Obligations 14.0% Section 5

! Maximum Interest Rate of Taxable Variable Rate Demand Obligations 18.0% Section 5

! Maturity Dates 11/1/2044 Section 5

! Underwriter’s Discount .60% Section 7

Basic Documents Requiring Approval

The Approving Resolution, provided as Attachment I, is in final draft form. Its approval by the Board will authorize the execution of a Twelfth Supplemental Indenture to the 1988 General Indenture, a Bond Purchase Agreement, and an Official Statement.

The Twelfth Supplemental Indenture is a contract between the Board and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as trustee, for the Bank to serve as custodian of funds and as authorized representative of bondholders in order to ensure compliance by the Board with provisions of the Indenture.

The Official Statement is a disclosure document which describes in detail the security and financial information regarding the bond issue. The Official Statement is used by the Underwriters to market the bonds to potential investors.

The Bond Purchase Agreement is a contract between the Underwriters, (UBS Financial Services Inc., Citigroup Global Markets Inc., Wells Fargo Brokerage Services, LLC, and Zions First National Bank) and the Board that sets forth the terms under which the Underwriters will purchase the bonds. This agreement will contain the selling price of the bonds, any premium or discount, the interest rates the bonds will bear, the conditions which must be met in order to close the sale of the bonds, and a description of any restrictions with respect to the responsibilities of the Board and/or the Underwriters (“Co-Managers”).

The Approving Resolution delegates authority to the Board’s Chair, Vice Chair and/or Chair of the Finance, Facilities, and Accountability Committee to approve final versions of the documents described above, State Board of Regents Tab H, Page 3 of 3 & Attachment(s) January 6, 2005 Page 3 consistent with parameters contained in the Approving Resolution, and along with designated Officers of the Board, to execute other necessary implementing agreements. (See Resolution sections 8 through 12.)

Copies of the draft bond documents described above were mailed under separate cover to members of the Finance, Facilities and Accountability Committee. Copies are available upon request for other members of the Board from Richard Davis at (801) 321-7285. Assistant Commissioner Richard Davis, UHEAA’s Chief Financial Officer, representatives of the Attorney General’s Office and Bond Counsel will be at the Board of Regents meeting on January 14 to answer questions.

Policy Implications

Timely sale of the Board’s Student Loan Revenue Bonds, 2005 Series W and X, is projected to ensure uninterrupted access of Utah’s students and families to acquire affordable student loans through September 2005. Additional bonds may be proposed for issuance either late in 2005 or early 2006. Any decisions by participating lenders to sell their student loans to UHEAA, earlier than the custom, may result in a recommendation for accelerating the issuance of additional student loan revenue bonds.

Options Considered

The Student Finance Subcommittee, Program Officers, Underwriters and Bond Counsel periodically review and consider a wide range of financing facilities and structures. The possible merits of locking in current low interest rates by issuing the refunding bonds as fixed rate bonds are considered each time. However, the current variable rate bonds, as recommended for the entire issue, will more closely track the federal government’s annual resetting of borrower interest rates and quarterly resetting of special allowance payments.

Recommendation

It is the recommendation of the Commissioner that the Board of Regents approve the attached Approving Resolution for the Board’s Student Loan Revenue Bonds, 2005 Series W and X.

Richard E. Kendell, Commissioner

Attachment

REK/MHS/ROD

Tab I, Page 1 of 1

January 06, 2005

MEMORANDUM

TO: State Board of Regents

FROM: Richard E. Kendell

SUBJECT: University of Utah Sale of Land and Easement to UDOT

Background

The Utah Department of Transportation seeks to purchase a small strip of land and a drainage easement on the southern boundary of the University’s Redwood Clinic as part of highway improvements along State Road 201.

Issue UDOT maintains a fund for purchase of easements and small parcels of property necessary to ensure proper right of way. For this project, UDOT seeks to purchase a 2’ x 618’ strip of land and assume a perpetual drainage easement that is 10’ x 618’. Negotiations between the University of Utah and UDOT estimate the value of the transaction to be approximately $98,000.

Please find attached to this memo a letter from University of Utah Vice President Arnold B. Combe that serves as the University’s official request.

Recommendation

The Commissioner recommends that the Regents approve the University’s request to sell the land and easement to UDOT as detailed.

Richard E. Kendell, Commissioner REK/MHS/KW Tab J, Page 1 of 1

January 5, 2005

MEMORANDUM

TO: State Board of Regents

FROM: Richard E. Kendell

SUBJECT: Snow College Non-State Funded Project (Tentative)

Background

Snow College may have an opportunity to move forward on a non-state funded project that school officials anticipated would not be an approval item until the 2006 Legislative Session.

Issue With the late arriving news that a development project may be funded this year, Snow College requests permission to present the idea to the Regents, should further talks warrant. Given that discussions are still underway, staff will bring a full explanation to the Regents at the meeting. If it appears the project will not be ready in time for the 2005 General Session of the Legislature, the item will be withdrawn.

Recommendation

No recommendation required.

Richard E. Kendell, Commissioner REK/MHS/KW Tab K, Page 1 of 1

January 5, 2005

MEMORANDUM

TO: State Board of Regents

FROM: Richard E. Kendell

SUBJECT: Action: Consent Calendar, Finance, Facilities, and Accountability Committee

It is the recommendation of the Commissioner that the Regents approve the following items on the Finance Facilities, and Accountability Committee Consent Calendar:

A. USHE Money Management Reports. Board Policy R541, Management and Reporting of Institutional Investments, directs that a comparative annual summary of investment results be submitted annually for Board approval. This comparative exhibit is compiled from reports submitted by the institutions. Complete institutional reports are on file in the Commissioner’s Office. The required exhibits are currently being compiled and verified, and a summary will be hand-carried to the board meeting. Due to audit delays, final numbers for Snow College, CEU, and UCAT are not yet available. This information will be incorporated into the annual summary at the conclusion of the audit process. In compliance with the Money Management Act of 1974, the final money management report will also be submitted to the Governor and Legislature.

B. OCHE Discretionary Funds Report. Board Policy R548, Institutional Discretionary Funds Administration and Accountability, requires Regents to review the 2003-04 report of Commissioner’s Office discretionary funds, as well as the 2004-05 budget for those funds. This report will subsequently be audited by internal audit staff. Discretionary funds are available for expenditure or transfer at the discretion of the president (or commissioner) of each institution. The sources of discretionary funds are investment income and unrestricted gifts and grants. Final numbers are currently being compiled and verified, and the report will be hand-carried to the board meeting.

C. USHE – UofU and USU – Capital Facilities Delegation Reports (Attachment 1). In accordance with the capital facilities delegation policy adopted by the Regents and by the State Building Board, the attached reports are submitted to the Board for review. Officials from the institutions will be available to answer any questions that the Regents may have.

Richard E. Kendell, Commissioner REK/MHS/BRF Attachments Tab L, Page 1 of 1 & Attachment

January 6, 2005

TO: State Board of Regents

FROM: Richard E. Kendell

SUBJECT: USHE – Briefing on Governor Walker’s Budget Proposal

Issue

Each December the Governor reviews all state agency budget requests and prepares a Budget Recommendation which is forwarded to the Utah State Legislature for its consideration during the General Session. On December 10, 2004 Governor Walker released her budget recommendations. Attachment one shows how Governor Walker’s recommendations compared to the State Board of Regents’ budget request.

Governor Huntsman is currently reviewing the budget recommendation of Governor Walker and determining if he would like to propose a modified budget recommendation to the Legislature. It is expected that Governor Huntsman will release his budget recommendation prior to the beginning of the 2005 General Legislative session.

Commissioner’s Recommendation

This is a discussion item only; no action is needed.

Richard E. Kendell, Commissioner REK/MHS/KW/KH Attachments Tab L- Attachment 1

Utah System of Higher Education December 13, 2004 2005-06 Operating Budget Comparisons (Tax Funds Only) Board of Regents Request, GOPB's Recommendation, and Governor Walker Recommendation Comparison

Board of Regents Governor Walker Recommendation Above/ Amount Amount (Below) SBR

Utah System of Higher Education Budget Priorities Compensation (1) Common Compensation Package TBD $22,010,800 22,010,800 Subtotal - USHE Priority Ongoing Increases TBD 22,010,800 22,010,800

Utah System of Higher Education Ongoing Budget Priorities Compensation (continued) Retention of Key Faculty & Staff 3,750,000 0 (3,750,000) Infrastructure 2005-06 New Facilities Operation and Maintenance 2,620,800 2,183,800 (437,000) 2004-05 New Facilities Operation and Maintenance 2,500,200 2,500,200 0 Fuel and Power 14,340,600 3,310,500 (11,030,100) State ISF Rate Changes 200,000 (342,600) (542,600) State Strategic Initiatives Nursing Initiaive - Phase 2 of 3 2,000,000 1,500,000 (500,000) Engineering Initiative - Phase 4 of 5 1,500,000 1,500,000 0 Enhancement of Techonolgy Delivered Courses 1,500,000 750,000 (750,000) Need Based Student Aid 1,500,000 1,500,000 0 New Century Scholarships 530,000 530,000 0 Access Institutional Funding Correction 5,000,000 0 (5,000,000) Subtotal - USHE Priority Ongoing Increases 35,441,600 13,431,900 (22,009,700)

One-time Increases Software Licensing and Upgrades $1,000,000 $500,000 ($500,000) Engineering Initiative 1,000,000 1,000,000 0 Nursing Initiative 500,000 500,000 0 Libraries 500,000 0 (500,000) Student Financial Aid Base Maintenance -- Federal Match 265,000 265,000 0 Student Financial Aid Base Maintenance -- UCOPE 500,000 500,000 0 T.H. Bell -- Teacher Incentive Loan Program 450,000 450,000 0 ADA Accommodations 600,000 600,000 0

Total One-time Increases $4,815,000 $3,815,000 ($1,000,000)

Supplemental Increases Fuel and Power $12,599,200 $0 ($12,599,200) New Century Scholarship 253,600 253,600 0

Total Supplemental Increases $12,852,800 $253,600 ($12,599,200)

Notes: (1) SBR requested that USHE employees be treated equitably with respect to Compensation and did not request a dollar value. GOPB Compensation Package - COLA 3% GOPB Health Insurance Adjustment - 11.8% GOPB Dental Insurance Adjustment - 6% Tab M, Page 1 of 2 & Attachments

January 5, 2005 MEMORANDUM

TO: State Board of Regents

FROM: Richard E. Kendell

SUBJECT: Briefing on Student Financial Aid

Issue

In preparation for a presentation to a Legislative appropriations subcommittee, staff members present a briefing paper summarizing key issues related to student financial aid, student loans, and the role of UHEAA in assisting Utah students.

Discussion

Included in the USHE 2005-2006 Budget Proposal is a request for $1.5 million of new funds for need-based financial aid. These funds are urgently needed to counter-balance tuition increases which for 2005-2006 are expected to continue the five-year USHE trend of at least 9 percent. While Utah has historically been known as a low-tuition/low-aid state, a more accurate current description would be medium-tuition/low-aid. In fact, in terms of tax-funds per FTE for need-based aid, Utah is among the lowest states in nation (ranks 43rd).

The state line-item for financial aid has hovered around $5.3 million for several years. (This appears in two line items - Student Financial Aid and UCOPE.) In partial recognition of the need for additional funding, the 2004 Legislature appropriated $1 million in one-time funding for financial aid. Institutions may also use some statutorily-approved tuition waivers based on financial need (see Attachment 3, page 19). In addition, the Legislature has funded a number of merit-based programs which provide assistance to certain categories of students (WICHE exchange programs, Engineering Loan Repayment, New Century Scholarship, T.H. Bell Teacher Incentive Loan Program). Merit-based Tuition Waiver programs are also a form of financial assistance to students, but are not funded by line item.

The Regents recently heard a brief report from Pat Callan, lead author of Measuring Up 2004. Associated with Utah’s “C” grade in AFFORDABILITY, the report states: “Over the past decade, Utah has made no notable progress in providing affordable higher education opportunities.” The report also concludes: “The state’s investment in need-based financial aid is very low when compared with top-performing states.”

Tab M, Page 2 of 2 & Attachments

State Board of Regents January 5, 2005

The information in support of this budget request category is presented in the following three sections.

Attachment 1 – Role of UHEAA. By Utah statute, the Board of Regents constitutes a separate entity defined as the Utah Higher Education Assistance Authority. The Board delegates operation of UHEAA to a subsidiary Board of Directors, chaired by a Regent. UHEAA: • Operates the student loan guarantee program. By agreement with the U.S. Secretary of Education, UHEAA guarantees loans under the Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFELP). In FFELP, local financial institutions make student loans, UHEAA guarantees and services the loans, and the federal government provides reinsurance on the loans. • Operates the Utah secondary loan market. UHEAA purchases UHEAA-guaranteed loans from the lenders, originates consolidation loans, and provides FFELP lender-of-last-resort loans to Utah students if necessary. • Operates the Utah Educational Savings Plan Trust (UESP). UESP provides a tax-exempt vehicle to save for the college expenses of children and grandchildren. • Administers federal and state financial aid programs in Utah. UHEAA works with institutional financial aid officers to ensure that funding reaches students most in need.

Attachment 2 – Extent of Need and Status of Borrowing. The tables and graphs in this section illustrate the number of Utah students qualifying for need-based aid, number of students receiving grants and loans, and the current volume of borrowing in Utah. Perhaps most important is the final graph, showing ascending slopes for tuition, grants, and borrowing, contrasted with a flat slope for tax fund support.

Attachment 3 – Draft Financial Aid Chapter for the 2005 Data Book (Data Book Tab F). This chapter contains more information than can be reviewed in the January Board meeting. However, highlights include: • Statutory Tuition Waivers. These should be viewed as institution-based financial aid, since most are not funded by line-item tax funds. (see pages 19-25) • Tuition Set Asides for Need-Based Aid. Regents have twice approved a 0.5 percent tuition to be used for need-based aid. These funds now amount to $2.3 million, assisting over 3,000 students. (see pages 23-24)

Recommendation

This report is intended as information only. No action is needed.

REK/MHS Attachments Richard E. Kendell, Commissioner

Tab M Attachment

Utah Higher Education Assistance Authority January, 2005

The Utah Higher Education Assistance Authority (UHEAA) exercises delegated responsibility for oversight and governance of the student financial aid programs on behalf of the State Board of Regents.

• UHEAA is a major Utah financial institution. In FY 2004, it guaranteed over 98,000 new student loans valued at $454 million. By operating the programs locally, UHEAA provides millions of dollars in savings to its student loan borrowers ($14.4 million in borrower benefits in fiscal 2004).

• UHEAA’s cohort default rate is 2.7% which ranks 6th lowest nationally. The national cohort default is 5.2%.

• UHEAA’s Loan Purchase Program’s (LPP’s) portfolio of student loans consisted of over 123,000 borrowers with an aggregate outstanding balance of $1.24 billion.

• The Utah Educational Savings Plan (UESP) Trust encourages savings for college. As of December 31, 2004 UESP had approximately 53,000 participant agreements with account balances over $870 million.

• In 2003-04 the Utah Centennial Opportunity Program for Education (UCOPE) provided 1,900 grant awards ($1.3 million) and 250 work-study opportunities ($641,000) to needy Utah students.

• UHEAA has 161 FTE employees and will be adding approximately 10 loan servicing staff employees annually as the loan servicing portfolio grows over the next few years.

• UHEAA’s FY 2005 combined operating budgets total $104 million. All budget expenses are paid from UHEAA revenues with no state appropriation.

Tab M Attachment

UHEAA Loan Volume by School School Rankings by Loan Volume Fiscal Year 2004

Percent of Total UHEAA Rank School Dollar Volume Volume 1 University of Utah$ 65,224,504 20.90% 2 Brigham Young University$ 48,032,991 15.39% 3 Utah State University$ 32,661,714 10.47% 4 Utah Valley State College$ 27,719,491 8.88% 5 Brigham Young University - Idaho$ 19,732,386 6.32% 6 Utah College of Massage Therapy (all campuses)$ 18,898,826 6.06% 7 Stevens-Henager College (all campuses)$ 16,757,234 5.37% 8 Westminster College$ 14,651,186 4.70% 9 Weber State University$ 12,225,771 3.92% 10 University of Phoenix$ 10,795,887 3.46% 11 Salt Lake Community College$ 9,999,828 3.20% 12 Southern Utah University$ 7,900,959 2.53% 13 Provo College$ 4,593,266 1.47% 14 Paul Mitchell The School (all campuses)$ 3,745,648 1.20% 15 Dixie State College of Utah$ 3,510,697 1.13% 16 Eagle Gate College $ 3,135,392 1.00% 17 American Institute of Medical & Dental (all campuses)$ 2,004,783 0.64% 18 Snow College$ 1,706,875 0.55% 19 LDS Business College$ 1,164,681 0.37% 20 College of Eastern Utah$ 718,321 0.23% 21 Brigham Young University - Hawaii$ 675,504 0.22% 22 Myotherapy Institute of Utah$ 586,344 0.19% 23 Northface University$ 498,933 0.16% 24 Bon Losee Academy of Hair Artistry$ 472,299 0.15% 25 Fran Brown College of Beauty - Layton$ 348,897 0.11% 26 Francois D Hair Design Academy$ 306,179 0.10% 27 Mountain West College $ 193,331 0.06% 28 Healing Mountain Massage School $ 180,030 0.06% 29 Beau La Reine College of Beauty Culture$ 114,725 0.04% 30 Skinworks School of Advanced Skincare$ 112,343 0.04% 31 International Institute of Hair Design - Taylorsville$ 108,407 0.03% 32 Sherman Kendall's Academy (all campuses)$ 66,126 0.02% 33 Evans Hairstyling College - Cedar City$ 64,721 0.02% 34 Stacey's Hands of Champions Beauty College$ 35,802 0.01% 35 Ogden Institute of Massage Therapy$ 26,500 0.01% 36 ITT Technical Institute$ 19,040 0.01% 37 Hairitage College of Beauty - Murray$ 18,375 0.01%

Remaining Out-of-State Schools$ 3,007,663 0.96%

TOTAL LOAN VOLUME FOR FY 2004$ 312,015,659 Tab M Attachment

UHEAA Lender Volume Lender Rankings by Loan Volume Fiscal Year 2004

Percent of FY 04 Change In Percent Market Share Rank Lender Dollar Volume of Market From FY 03

1 Wells Fargo - EFS $ 78,419,262 25.13% -4.13% 2 Zions First National Bank$ 67,668,738 21.69% -0.98% 3 America First Credit Union$ 31,100,555 9.97% -7.20% 4 Washington Mutual$ 30,522,005 9.78% 1.05% 5 U.S. Bank$ 19,086,277 6.12% 9.37% 6 Mountain America Credit Union$ 18,833,483 6.04% 0.20% 7 Bank One Western Region$ 16,506,604 5.29% 29.96% 8 Utah Community Credit Union$ 14,067,846 4.51% -8.47% 9 KeyBank USA$ 10,852,734 3.48% 9.73% 10 University of Utah Credit Union$ 10,135,977 3.25% -8.47% 11 Deseret First Credit Union$ 3,716,931 1.19% 28.19% 12 Family First Credit Union$ 2,159,736 0.69% -4.20% 13 Granite District Credit Union$ 2,044,276 0.66% -11.13% 14 USU Community Credit Union$ 1,850,987 0.59% -4.23% 15 Jordan Credit Union$ 1,622,448 0.52% -2.13% 16 Weber State Credit Union$ 1,601,598 0.51% 148.50% 17 Tooele Federal Credit Union$ 1,172,489 0.38% 7.78% 18 Salt Lake City Credit Union$ 651,504 0.21% 509.14% 19 Mountain High Federal Credit Union$ 1,313 0.00% n/a 20 Alliance Credit Union$ 896 0.00% n/a

TOTAL LOAN VOLUME FOR FY 2004$ 312,015,659 100.00% Tab M Attachment

Cohort Default Rates for Fiscal Year 1999-2002

Guaranty Agencies

Ranked by FY 2002 Default Rates

FY 99 FY 00 FY 01 FY 02 4 Yr. Rank INSTITUTION State %%%%Ave. 1 Vermont Student Assistance Corporation VT 2.9 3.1 2.7 1.0 2.4 2 South Carolina State Ed. Assistance Authority SC 1.4 1.5 1.1 1.5 1.4 3 North Carolina State Ed. Assistance Authority NC 5.5 8.3 5.1 1.5 5.1 4 American Student Assistance Corp. MA 3.8 3.9 3.4 1.7 3.2 5 New Hampshire Higher Ed. Assistance Foundation NH 1.5 1.4 1.8 2.0 1.7 6 Utah Higher Education Assistance Authority UT 2.7 2.8 3.3 2.7 2.9 7 Education Assistance Corporation SD 2.8 3.5 3.8 3.1 3.3 8 Student Loans of North Dakota ND 1.1 3.0 3.4 3.8 2.8 9 Great Lakes Higher Education Corporation WI 4.3 4.4 4.0 4.1 4.2 10 USA Services IN 5.6 6.1 4.5 4.4 5.2 11 National Student Loan Program NE 6.6 5.0 5.4 4.4 5.4 12 Coordinating Board for Higher Education MO 7.2 7.2 6.5 4.5 6.4 13 New York State Higher Education Services Corp. NY 5.1 4.4 4.0 4.6 4.5 14 Northwest Education Loan Association WA 5.8 5.5 5.5 4.7 5.4 15 Pennsylvania Higher Ed. Assistance Authority PA 4.4 4.7 5.2 4.9 4.8 16 Connecticut Student Loan Foundation CT 4.9 4.1 4.1 5.0 4.5 17 Maine Education Assistance Division ME 4.7 7.5 6.1 5.1 5.9 18 New Mexico Student Loan Guarantee Corp. NM 4.8 7.9 8.5 5.4 6.7 19 Educational Credit Management Corporation MN 5.0 4.8 5.7 5.6 5.3 20 Tennessee Student Assistance Corporation TN 6.8 6.7 6.8 5.7 6.5 21 New Jersey Higher Ed. Student Assist. Authority NJ 5.4 4.7 5.4 5.8 5.3 22 Oregon State Scholarship Commission OR 3.5 5.9 6.1 6.2 5.4 23 Rhode Island Higher Ed.Assistance Authority RI 6.2 5.7 6.2 6.5 6.2 24 California Student Aid Commission/EdFund CA 6.3 7.0 6.7 6.5 6.6 25 Colorado Student Loan Program CO 5.2 6.6 6.7 6.5 6.3 26 Guaranteed Student Loan Program (MT) MT 9.2 6.3 7.7 6.6 7.5 27 Illinois Student Assistant Commission IL 4.5 4.9 5.6 6.7 5.4 28 Louisiana Office of Student Financial Assistance LA 6.0 6.8 6.6 6.7 6.5 29 Texas Guaranteed Student Loan Corporation TX 6.9 7.7 8.0 7.0 7.4 30 Student Loan Guarantee Foundation of Arkansas AR 7.3 8.9 8.4 7.1 7.9 31 Iowa College Student Aid Commission IA 5.3 7.7 8.6 7.5 7.3 32 Oklahoma Guaranteed Student Loan Program OK 6.6 8.2 8.8 7.5 7.8 33 Michigan Higher Education Assistance Authority MI 7.5 9.0 9.7 7.8 8.5 34 Higher Education Assistance Authority KY 5.0 5.3 7.4 8.2 6.5 35 Florida Department of Education FL 8.1 9.1 9.2 8.9 8.8 36 Georgia Higher Education Assistance Corp. GA 6.4 7.0 8.8 9.5 7.9 Tab M Attachment

Cohort Default Rates for the Federal Family Education Loan Program Fiscal Years 1999-2002

Participating Utah Schools

Ranked by FY 2002 Default Rates

FY99 FY00 FY01 FY02 4 Yr. INSTITUTION %%%%Ave. 1 Stacey’s Hands of Champions 00000 2 Evans Hairstyling College 00000 3 Beau La Reine College of Beauty 5.2 2.9 1.5 0 2.4 4 Francois D. Hair Design Academy 2.2 2.1 0 0 1.1 5 Brigham Young University 0.7 0.6 0.7 0.3 0.6 6 Westminster College 1.6 1.9 2.5 1.0 1.8 7 Utah State University 1.5 1.8 2.3 1.6 1.8 8 University of Utah 1.9 1.8 2.3 1.9 2.0 9 Paul Mitchell The School 2.7 1.0 2.2 2.0 2.0 10 Weber State University 2.6 3.6 4.0 2.3 3.1 11 American Institute of Medical & Dental Tech. 3.8 6.1 4.9 2.5 4.3 12 Sherman Kendall’s Academy of Beauty (Midvale) 0 2.7 2.3 2.9 2.0 13 Utah Valley State College 2.1 1.6 1.9 3.0 2.2 14 LDS Business College 3.5 2.5 1.8 3.2 2.8 15 Southern Utah University 3.6 2.4 3.2 3.4 3.2 16 Myotherapy College of Utah 8.7 4.7 4.8 3.7 5.5 17 Salt Lake Community College 4.4 5.1 5.5 5.1 5.0 18 Utah Career College* 8.5 11.0 11.0 5.1 8.9 19 College of Eastern Utah 6.2 7.4 7.7 5.3 6.7 20 International Institute of Hair Design 10.0 8.9 5.7 5.3 7.5 21 Hairitage College of Beauty 18.7 0 8.3 5.5 8.1 22 ITT Technical Institute 8.0 8.6 7.7 5.9 7.6 23 Fran Brown College of Beauty 7.6 2.1 5.0 6.2 5.2 24 Snow College 5.7 4.6 5.2 6.4 5.5 25 Utah College of Massage Therapy 3.9 5.1 6.5 6.7 5.6 26 Bon Losee Academy of Hair Artistry 2.9 1.9 0 7.1 3.0 27 Dixie State College of Utah 8.1 8.2 6.2 7.4 7.5 28 Provo College 7.7 11.5 9.5 7.6 9.1 29 Certified Careers Institute* 8.8 11.5 12.2 8.0 10.1 30 Northface University 12.0 10.5 11.7 10.4 11.2 31 Eagle Gate College 0 0 0 11.1 2.8 32 Stevens Henager College 8.5 8.6 12.1 11.3 10.1 33 Mountain West College 13.0 9.6 15.6 13.8 13.0

Other Utah-affiliated schools Brigham Young University - Hawaii 4.3 3.2 4.2 2.2 3.5 Brigham Young University - Idaho 1.5 0.8 1.3 1.7 1.3 University of Phoenix (AZ) 4.6 5.2 5.8 6.4 5.5

* Direct Loan school Tab M Attachment Student Aid Information USHE Schools (excluding UCAT) Comparison between Fiscal Years 2000 and 2004

How is student need determined?

Need is defined as the “Cost of Attendance” less an “Expected Family Contribution.” Each institution computes a “Cost of Attendance” using federal guidelines. Cost of Attendance Tuition/Fees Room & Institution Books Board Misc TOTAL UU $4,468 $8,190 $4,734 $17,392 USU $4,380 $5,400 $3,080 $12,860 WSU $3,776 $6,030 $3,872 $13,678 SUU $4,090 $5,400 $3,550 $13,040 DSC $2,824 $3,736 $4,758 $11,318 SNOW $2,644 $3,800 $2,200 $8,644 CEU $2,562 $3,276 $2,504 $8,342 UVSC $4,246 $5,796 $2,810 $12,852 SLCC $3,760 $7,740 $2,430 $13,930 Weighted Avg $4,351 $6,569 $3,963 $15,213

Who needs student aid?

Between FY 2000 and 2004 eligibility for need based aid grew faster than enrollment. Enrollment increased by 15% while eligible applicants for aid by 36%.

Enrollment - Undergraduate Headcount Institution FY 00 FY 01 FY 02 FY 03 FY 04 UU 20,301 20,610 21,778 23,555 23,521 USU 16,353 16,729 17,909 17,924 18,245 WSU 15,175 16,093 16,958 18,330 18,834 SUU 5,761 5,702 5,828 5,623 5,783 SNOW 4,081 4,092 4,096 3,768 4,036 DIXIE 6,191 6,515 7,255 7,473 7,682 CEU 2,688 2,706 2,746 2,646 2,692 UVSC 20,062 20,946 22,609 23,609 23,803 SLCC 21,273 22,109 24,215 23,872 24,153 TOTAL 111,886 115,502 123,394 126,800 128,749

1 Tab M Attachment

UNDERGRADUATE HEADCOUNT

25,000

20,000

15,000

10,000

5,000

0 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04

UU USU WSU SUU SNOW DIXIE CEU UVSC SLCC

This table summarizes the number of students who completed the federal form (FAFSA) and qualified for some type of financial aid.

Need Based Aid - Eligible Undergraduate Applicants (FAFSA) Institution FY 00 FY 01 FY 02 FY 03 FY 04 UU 10,292 9,079 9,673 10,873 11,293 USU 8,618 9,137 9,729 10,294 10,676 WSU 7,858 8,143 8,999 10,267 10,827 SUU 3,541 3,429 3,491 3,574 3,640 SNOW 1,613 1,652 1,806 1,702 1,697 DIXIE 1,931 1,879 2,004 2,241 2,313 CEU 1,537 1,546 1,468 1,571 1,455 UVSC 9,992 12,063 15,735 18,649 17,406 SLCC 7,000 7,222 8,434 10,152 11,758 TOTAL 52,382 54,150 61,339 69,323 71,065

2 Tab M Attachment

Availability of Need Based Aid?

Federal Pell Grants are by far the largest source of need based aid. Pell is awarded to only the most needy students. In FY 2000, the average Pell award, made to 27,127 students, was $1,818. In FY 2004 the average award increased by 30% to $2,366, due mostly to a change in the regulations which increased the potential maximum award. The number of recipients increased by 51% to 40,849 students.

In addition to Pell grants, students attending USHE institutions are also eligible for Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants (SEOG), Leveraging Educational Assistance Partnership Grants(LEAP), and Utah Centennial Opportunity Program for Education Grants (UCOPE).

If added together (Pell, SEOG, LEAP, UCOPE) and awarded to Pell recipients, the need based grant aid average award would be $2,554.

Need Based Federal/State Grants Institution FY 00 FY 01 FY 02 FY 03 FY 04

UU $7,527,847 $8,310,801 $10,802,149 $13,494,709 $14,599,247 USU 11,211,247 12,477,882 15,906,614 18,519,208 19,330,001 WSU 6,792,072 7,656,467 9,576,503 11,445,212 12,152,884 SUU 4,754,548 5,110,810 5,890,613 6,386,092 6,768,581 SNOW 1,543,700 2,319,641 2,880,903 2,960,918 2,960,130 DIXIE 2,610,123 2,888,541 3,718,515 4,583,432 4,995,181 CEU 1,876,525 2,023,162 2,455,226 2,789,691 2,713,348 UVSC 5,696,770 8,586,945 13,080,549 16,789,102 19,035,790 SLCC 5,385,077 6,493,457 8,671,907 12,174,964 14,084,275

Pell Total $47,397,909 $55,867,706 $72,982,979 $89,143,328 $96,639,437

SEOG/LEAP $4,370,074 $4,786,688 $6,091,303 $6,726,931 $5,914,314 UCOPE $1,800,030 $1,639,990 $2,720,000 $2,036,000 $1,775,000

NEED BASED GRANTS

20,000,000

16,000,000

12,000,000

8,000,000

4,000,000

0 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04

UU USU WSU SUU SNOW DIXIE CEU UVSC SLCC

3 Tab M Attachment

How much do students borrow?

Borrowing has become an increasingly important means of financing educational opportunities. Since FY 00 the number of borrowers has increased by 64% and the amount borrowed by 68%. For students who borrow, the average debt burden at graduation is up 32% to $14,665.

Loan Volume by School Institution FY 00 FY 01 FY 02 FY 03 FY 04 UU $23,090,453 $21,813,719 $24,167,991 $29,057,069 $32,232,555 USU 19,190,296 19,005,959 20,916,347 22,007,265 23,757,009 WSU 6,720,658 7,443,919 7,271,393 8,531,862 9,212,696 SUU 6,508,972 6,578,248 6,131,528 6,574,755 6,837,702 SNOW 1,083,908 1,198,194 1,355,307 1,465,840 1,431,876 DIXIE 1,465,130 1,730,242 1,765,720 2,415,981 3,042,900 CEU 696,453 733,977 718,185 761,831 639,720 UVSC 3,393,437 7,808,588 15,041,105 19,943,620 24,957,693 SLCC 3,849,199 4,151,053 4,747,221 6,446,497 8,937,312 TOTAL $65,998,506 $70,463,899 $82,114,797 $97,204,720 $111,049,463

LOAN VOLUME

35,000,000

28,000,000

21,000,000

14,000,000

7,000,000

0 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04

UU USU WSU SUU SNOW DIXIE CEU UVSC SLCC

4 Tab M Attachment

The following table describes how individual debt burden has increased over time. For example, an average borrower who completes his course work in 1992 after one year of study would have debt of $2,724. In 2003 the same scenario would result in debt of $3,619.

Average Debt Burden by Highest Grade Level & Out-of-School Date 1-5 = Undergraduate years 1 thru 5; A-D = Graduate years 1 thru 4+

Year 1 2 3 4 5 A B C D 1992 $2,724.02 $4,287.86 $5,595.38 $7,213.85 $8,366.66 $11,098.88 $15,263.81 $20,641.58 $24,395.88 1993 $2,792.53 $4,632.58 $5,777.50 $7,762.99 $8,620.63 $11,855.38 $16,925.76 $21,147.85 $28,882.72 1994 $2,939.73 $5,093.12 $6,719.50 $8,933.24 $10,012.82 $13,021.20 $18,341.74 $23,271.33 $30,973.99 1995 $3,098.12 $5,367.43 $7,240.16 $10,220.83 $11,135.16 $13,187.40 $18,260.25 $26,573.22 $34,381.96 1996 $3,095.63 $5,230.62 $7,392.81 $10,845.34 $11,478.25 $14,986.06 $19,896.30 $31,583.09 $40,883.79 1997 $2,945.94 $5,491.85 $8,025.97 $11,393.62 $12,113.06 $15,966.41 $22,267.61 $35,364.42 $45,944.17 1998 $3,016.95 $5,371.92 $7,841.84 $11,702.72 $12,484.84 $17,335.74 $22,482.08 $36,992.30 $51,703.71 1999 $3,039.02 $5,584.67 $7,685.04 $11,545.16 $12,513.77 $16,951.57 $23,851.21 $35,619.98 $56,011.34 2000 $3,188.17 $6,007.27 $7,436.21 $11,043.94 $12,326.95 $16,478.55 $26,587.74 $36,826.64 $60,219.56 2001 $3,278.82 $6,310.26 $8,215.08 $12,501.17 $12,978.65 $20,281.19 $31,525.92 $41,225.52 $66,466.26 2002 $3,356.53 $6,304.86 $8,908.99 $13,304.13 $14,435.22 $22,207.03 $33,987.41 $45,995.80 $72,677.53 2003 $3,619.80 $6,916.75 $9,091.99 $13,079.07 $14,582.36 $24,913.86 $38,309.47 $51,571.86 $84,849.43

AVERAGE DEBT BURDEN

90,000

80,000

70,000

60,000

50,000

40,000

30,000

20,000

10,000

0 UNDER 1 UNDER 2 UNDER 3 UNDER 4 UNDER 5 GRAD 1 GRAD 2 GRAD 3 GRAD 4

1992 2003

5 Tab M Attachment

USHE COMBINED

120%

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0% FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 HEADCOUNT GRANTS LOANS TUITION TAX FUNDS

FY00 Represents the base line year.

6 Student Financial Aid Tab F

USHE Data Book 2005-06

I. State Student Financial Access Programs ...... 1

TABLE 1 Utah Educational Savings Plan Trust (UESP)...... 2

TABLE 2 Utah Centennial Opportunity Program for Education (UCOPE) ...... 2

II. Campus-Based Student Financial Aid...... 3

TABLE 3 Federal and State Matching Student Financial Aid...... 5

III. Program-Based Student Financial Aid ...... 7

TABLE 4 Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE) and Regional Dental Exchange Program (RDEP) ...... 9

TABLE 5 Terrel H. Bell Teaching Incentive Loan (TIL)...... 10

TABLE 6 New Century Scholarship Program ...... 11

TABLE 7 Participation in the Utah Engineering and Computer Science Loan Forgiveness Program (UECLP) data for $500,000 One-time Appropriation from 2001-02 (as of November 2004)...... 11

TABLE 8 USHE Educationally Disadvantaged Programs...... 12

IV. Federal Family Education Loan Program (Federal Stafford, Plus, & Consolidation Loans) ...... 13

TABLE 9 UHEAA Gross Guarantees Annual Volume...... 15

TABLE 10 UHEAA Gross Guarantees, Federal Subsidized Stafford, Unsubsidized Stafford & PLUS, by Lender...... 16

TABLE 11 UHEAA Gross Guarantees by Institution for Subsidized Stafford, Unsubsidized, Total Stafford Loan Program, and PLUS Program ...... 17

V. Utah State Board of Regents Loan Purchase Program...... 18

TABLE 12 Student Loans Purchased by Loan Purchase Program Since 1994...... 18 Student Financial Aid Tab F Continued

USHE Data Book 2005-06

VI. Statutory Tuition Waivers...... 19

TABLE 13 USHE Statutory Tuition Waivers ...... 21

VII. Tuition Set Asides for Need-based Financial Aid ...... 26

TABLE 14 USHE First Tier Tuition Set Aside for Financial Aid...... 27

STUDENT FINANCIAL AID

This tab contains information on student financial aid programs in the USHE. Similar programs are grouped together in different sections of the report. The sections are: I. State Student Financial Access Programs II. Federal Campus-based Student Financial Aid III. Program–based Student Financial Aid IV. Federal Family Education Loan Program V. Utah State Board of Regents Loan Purchase Program VI. Statutory Tuition Waivers VII. Tuition Set Asides for Need-based Financial Aid

I. STATE STUDENT FINANCIAL ACCESS PROGRAMS

INTRODUCTION

The following tables provide statistical information for two state-funded student financial aid programs administered by the Utah Higher Education Assistance Authority: The Utah Educational Savings Plan Trust (UESP) and the Utah Centennial Opportunity Program for Education (UCOPE) are described in further detail below.

Program Description Utah Educational Savings Plan Trust UESP was established by the 1996 Utah State Legislature to (UESP) provide individuals with an opportunity to save for the future educational expenses of their children, grandchildren or other young persons. Funds saved through UESP are invested, with the assistance of the State Treasurer, in nine investment options utilizing stocks, bonds, short term money market funds, or age- adjusting blends.

At the time the beneficiary of the account is ready to attend a higher education institution, principal and interest saved on the beneficiary’s behalf will be accessible to cover qualified higher education expenses. Beneficiaries may attend any accredited college or university nationwide. Beneficiaries can be changed without penalty. Utah Centennial Opportunity UCOPE is a state supplement to increasingly strained grant and Program for Education (UCOPE) work-study assistance from Federal Government student financial aid programs. Program funds may be used for either grants or work-study awards to Utah resident students with demonstrated financial need, using the Federal needs analysis methodology. UCOPE funds are allotted to participating eligible institutions based on their population of resident students with high financial need as evidenced by the award of Federal Pell Grants.

1 Table 1 Utah Education Savings Plan (UESP) Trust by Fiscal Year

# of Total of Account Endowment Total Agreements Balances Credits Value Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1997 266 $271,601 $901 $272,502

Fiscal 1998 Net Changes 198 $428,990 $5,114 $434,104 June 30, 1998 464 $700,591 $6,015 $706,606

Fiscal 1999 Net Changes 329 $506,152 $10,981 $517,133 June 30, 1999 793 $1,206,743 $16,996 $1,223,739

Fiscal 2000 Net Changes 893 $4,246,238 $21,110 $4,267,348 June 30, 2000 1,686 $5,452,981 $38,106 $5,491,087

Fiscal 2001 Net Changes 6,642 $35,934,729 $30,244 $35,964,973 June 30, 2001 8,328 $41,387,710 $68,350 $41,456,060

Fiscal 2002 Net Changes 16,715 $176,838,525 $17,294 $176,855,819 June 30, 2002 25,043 $218,226,235 $85,644 $218,311,879

Fiscal 2003 Net Changes 11,401 $212,737,569 $13,898 $212,751,467 June 30, 2003 36,444 $430,963,804 $99,542 $431,063,346

Fiscal 2004 Net Changes 10,341 $316,297,419 ($3,471) $316,293,949 30-Jun-04 46,785 $747,261,223 $96,071 $747,357,295

Table 2 Utah Centennial Opportunity Program for Education (UCOPE) 2003-04 Award Year

Administration GRANT AWARDS WORK-STUDY AWARDS Total Institution Expense # of Awards $ Amount # of Awards $ Amount Expended University of Utah $0 442 $239,008 0 $0 $239,008 Utah State University $9,682 224 $149,944 54 $163,094 $322,720 Weber State University $6,231 114 $145,950 13 $62,549 $214,730 Southern Utah University $3,435 88 $111,055 0 $0 $114,490 Snow College $0 178 $63,160 0 $0 $63,160 Dixie State College $2,469 63 $30,200 25 $49,631 $82,300 College of Eastern Utah $1,624 92 $42,815 15 $24,203 $68,642 Utah Valley State College $9,188 55 $183,422 38 $122,837 $315,447 Salt Lake Community College $707 411 $244,693 0 $0 $245,400 Westminster College $0 47 $28,380 0 $0 $28,380 Brigham Young University $0 59 $47,950 108 $218,532 $266,482 LDS Business College $0 5 $2,050 0 $0 $2,050 Davis ATC $0 14 $7,850 0 $0 $7,850 Bridgerland ATC $0 16 $4,890 0 $0 $4,890 Ogden-Weber ATC $415 53 $11,970 0 $0 $12,385 TOTAL $33,751 1,861 $1,313,337 253 $640,846 $1,987,934

2 II. FEDERAL CAMPUS-BASED STUDENT FINANCIAL AID

INTRODUCTION

The following tables provide statistical information for five federally-supported student financial aid programs. These programs all are "campus-based," including the LEAP Program (formerly known as SSIG) as operated in Utah. Awards under all five programs are required to be based on demonstrated financial need. Annual state appropriations to the Board of Regents provide for a part of the required matching funds for the Federal Work Study Program, and all required matching funds for the other four programs for USHE institutions. In addition to USHE institutions, Westminster College participates in the LEAP Program.

Program Description Federal Perkins The Federal Perkins Loan Program provides low interest (5 percent) loans with a Loans maximum 10 year repayment period to students with exceptional financial need. The Federal Perkins Loan Program is called a "campus-based" program since each institution is responsible for administering the program on its own campus. The matching requirement in this program is 25 percent of the capital contributions to the institutional loan fund. Federal Work-Study The FWS Program provides jobs for financially needy undergraduate and (FWS) graduate students who qualify for financial aid. Employers pay a portion of the student's wages while the FWS funds pay the remainder. FWS is also one of the campus-based programs with funding received directly from the U.S. Department of Education. Institutions are required to provide an annual match representing 25% of total Federal Work-Study funds. Federal Pell Grants The Federal Pell Grant Program is the largest federal student financial aid grant program. Federal Pell Grants are need-based awards to undergraduate students. Eligibility for Pell Grants is limited to students with the greatest financial need. Funding for the Federal Pell Grant Program comes directly from the U.S. Department of Education to the individual campuses. The Pell Grant Program is provided to every eligible applicant. Federal Supplemental The FSEOG Program is a grant program for undergraduate students with Educational exceptional need. Awards of up to $4,000 per year are available depending on Opportunity Grants the student's need and availability of funds. The FSEOG Program is also (FSEOG) considered a campus-based program. Funding for the program is provided by the U.S. Department of Education. The State matching requirement is 33 percent of Federal funds (25% of total funds).

Program Description Leveraging The LEAP Program (formerly known as the State Student Incentive Grant or SSIG Educational Program) is a grant program for undergraduate students with substantial financial Assistance need. Awards of up to $2,500 per year are available depending on the student's Partnership (LEAP) need and available funds. Funding is provided partially by the U.S. Department of Education with a minimum of 100 percent state matching and maintenance of effort requirement of the designated state agency. The LEAP Program in Utah operates on a decentralized basis with the individual institutions responsible for the determination of awards, using the Federal need analysis methodology.

4 Table 3 USHE Federal and State Matching Student Financial Aid

1994-95 1995-96 1996-97 1997-98 1998-99 No. of Dollar No. of Dollar No. of Dollar No. of Dollar No. of Dollar Institution Students Amount Students Amount Students Amount Students Amount Students Amount UOFU Perkins Loan 1,770 $4,342,595 1,884 $4,710,604 1,837 $3,804,356 1,916 $4,065,392 1,479 $4,268,488 FWS 447 $1,152,136 452 $1,225,483 448 $1,135,359 549 $1,380,429 465 $1,353,583 FSEOG 1,834 $897,460 2,174 $1,089,064 2,312 $1,191,418 1,668 $1,087,465 1,066 $968,220 SSIG 604 $288,217 722 $300,550 515 $220,539 647 $244,596 518 $193,750 Pell $7,099,597 $6,706,594 $6,762,806 $6,621,279 $7,500,511 TOTAL $13,780,005 $14,032,295 $13,114,478 $13,399,161 $14,284,552 USU Perkins Loan 1,217 $1,801,092 1,261 $1,829,998 1,376 $2,131,129 868 $1,893,980 796 $1,746,253 FWS 458 $650,720 601 $688,869 502 $632,249 513 $764,600 409 $742,280 FSEOG 1,286 $881,471 1,182 $840,842 1,409 $910,341 1,023 $825,002 1,279 $918,426 SSIG 342 $181,645 317 $199,535 239 $145,930 231 $173,750 250 $144,840 Pell $8,622,236 $8,196,056 $7,984,514 $8,781,737 $10,469,730 TOTAL $12,137,164 $11,755,300 $11,804,163 $12,439,069 $14,021,529 WSU Perkins Loan 645 $1,039,293 657 $1,425,003 559 $1,289,278 557 $1,224,604 591 $1,344,078 FWS 515 $985,346 464 $866,271 434 $860,850 442 $886,912 450 $868,940 FSEOG 782 $902,681 1,017 $979,755 685 $798,574 695 $868,198 658 $912,149 SSIG 153 $168,330 181 $173,680 139 $127,450 152 $133,410 88 $113,920 Pell $6,043,852 $5,961,818 $5,715,361 $5,967,324 $7,043,885 TOTAL $9,139,502 $9,406,527 $8,791,513 $9,080,448 $10,282,972 SUU Perkins Loan 147 $349,767 145 $344,373 136 $326,378 133 $335,428 170 $449,857 FWS 286 $264,739 279 $251,085 282 $275,909 291 $270,218 306 $283,069 FSEOG 737 $198,578 741 $157,509 924 $191,740 929 $191,959 795 $195,403 SSIG 68 $54,270 90 $63,084 63 $46,140 92 $55,930 74 $48,170 Pell $2,939,981 $2,899,900 $3,186,498 $3,724,000 $4,496,027 TOTAL $3,807,335 $3,715,951 $4,026,665 $4,577,535 $5,472,526 SNOW Perkins Loan 92 $175,218 93 $192,482 84 $190,467 82 $181,946 112 $253,760 FWS 92 $65,013 100 $78,807 118 $75,382 125 $121,688 109 $99,745 FSEOG 734 $93,989 694 $87,619 591 $87,897 548 $87,995 423 $89,900 SSIG 142 $30,310 169 $32,330 131 $23,720 148 $28,230 136 $23,450 Pell $1,234,919 $1,024,843 $1,175,353 $1,395,883 $1,505,759 TOTAL $1,599,449 $1,416,081 $1,552,819 $1,815,742 $1,972,614 DIXIE Perkins Loan 147 $312,688 165 $325,348 154 $315,764 170 $353,337 147 $353,358 FWS 84 $117,080 103 $173,716 113 $173,382 123 $217,489 134 $213,263 FSEOG 281 $154,839 440 $140,631 438 $154,034 384 $190,086 323 $143,661 SSIG 65 $32,590 118 $35,390 83 $25,970 69 $35,820 89 $30,170 Pell $1,433,604 $1,528,408 $1,691,308 $2,083,451 $2,494,927 TOTAL $2,050,801 $2,203,493 $2,360,458 $2,880,183 $3,235,379 CEU Perkins Loan 37 $55,743 55 $101,700 47 $88,701 26 $45,284 42 $62,398 FWS 69 $74,324 59 $61,800 59 $55,191 84 $78,589 85 $90,880 FSEOG 93 $55,438 113 $65,540 118 $54,892 143 $82,545 143 $68,921 SSIG 46 $26,170 50 $29,060 48 $21,320 53 $23,570 45 $18,960 Pell $1,516,697 $1,384,410 $1,412,808 $1,471,123 $1,839,031 TOTAL $1,728,372 $1,642,510 $1,632,912 $1,701,111 $2,080,190 UVSC Perkins Loan 135 $245,825 115 $247,398 138 $306,475 135 $320,684 143 $297,667 FWS 106 $170,975 79 $121,848 72 $110,416 107 $164,514 103 $144,659 FSEOG 1,089 $368,430 1,057 $345,234 1,299 $332,090 965 $342,618 699 $278,879 SSIG 295 $99,810 334 $111,310 432 $81,680 475 $107,430 457 $97,820 Pell $4,609,225 $4,429,401 $4,112,178 $4,622,101 $5,468,858 TOTAL $5,494,265 $5,255,191 $4,942,839 $5,557,347 $6,287,883 SLCC Perkins Loan 462 $544,517 608 $664,135 538 $663,595 480 $751,481 384 $691,269 FWS 124 $212,702 174 $269,813 131 $238,769 158 $235,916 215 $351,477 FSEOG 1,580 $606,822 1,445 $511,593 998 $456,036 773 $380,415 772 $355,668 SSIG 524 $173,890 581 $193,140 285 $141,720 313 $164,920 386 $140,900 Pell $5,614,726 $4,907,589 $4,689,853 $4,710,253 $5,183,993 TOTAL $7,152,657 $6,546,270 $6,189,973 $6,242,985 $6,723,307 TOTAL Perkins Loan 4,652 $8,866,738 4,983 $9,841,041 4,869 $9,116,143 4,367 $9,172,136 3,864 $9,467,128 USHE FWS 2,181 $3,693,035 2,311 $3,737,692 2,159 $3,557,507 2,392 $4,120,355 2,276 $4,147,896 FSEOG 8,416 $4,159,708 8,863 $4,217,787 8,774 $4,177,022 7,128 $4,056,283 6,158 $3,931,227 SSIG 2,239 $1,055,232 2,562 $1,138,079 1,935 $834,469 2,180 $967,656 2,043 $811,980 Pell $39,114,837 $37,039,019 $36,730,679 $39,377,151 $46,002,721 TOTAL $56,889,550 $55,973,618 $54,415,820 $57,693,581 $64,360,952

5 Table 3 Continued USHE Federal and State Matching Student Financial Aid

1999-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 No. of Dollar No. of Dollar No. of Dollar No. of Dollar No. of Dollar Institution Students Amount Students Amount Students Amount Students Amount Students Amount UOFU Perkins Loan 1,548 $4,342,148 1,437 $4,033,710 1,716 $4,769,964 2,348 $6,462,277 2,703 $8,910,832 FWS 1,500 $1,353,583 354 $1,091,821 391 $1,252,252 534 $1,755,490 454 $1,606,119 FSEOG 477 $851,040 1,112 $881,595 1,902 $1,510,634 1,937 $1,264,231 1,600 $867,207 LEAP/SSIG 550 $191,800 582 $192,901 863 $296,229 1,056 $366,476 1,054 $371,840 Pell $7,527,847 $8,310,804 5,085 $10,802,149 5,808 $13,494,709 6,128 $14,599,247 TOTAL $14,266,418 $14,510,831 $18,631,228 $23,343,183 $26,355,245 USU Perkins Loan 942 $1,705,871 1,052 $2,728,789 634 $1,715,407 1,140 $3,067,730 1,373 $3,390,247 FWS 1,451 $912,991 411 $799,579 344 $695,216 404 $923,044 473 $1,101,800 FSEOG 432 $690,960 1,249 $994,351 1,224 $830,288 1,323 $928,385 1,157 $773,374 LEAP/SSIG 288 $143,990 179 $142,118 291 $218,681 445 $276,569 356 $279,530 Pell $11,211,247 $12,477,882 6,819 $15,906,614 7,325 $18,519,208 7,419 $19,330,001 TOTAL $14,665,059 $17,142,719 $19,366,206 $23,714,936 $24,874,952 WSU Perkins Loan 717 $1,432,076 580 $1,496,510 557 $1,395,468 633 $1,616,563 663 $1,820,161 FWS 659 $923,831 396 $861,381 380 $982,976 438 $1,087,914 350 $995,055 FSEOG 437 $922,477 569 $928,731 552 $907,308 560 $837,440 467 $765,564 LEAP/SSIG 101 $116,070 87 $115,146 129 $177,877 141 $220,912 185 $222,950 Pell $6,792,072 $7,656,467 4,597 $9,576,503 5,276 $11,445,212 5,431 $12,152,884 TOTAL $10,186,526 $11,058,235 $13,040,132 $15,208,041 $15,956,614 SUU Perkins Loan 101 $333,000 76 $270,535 130 $420,119 138 $453,855 133 $468,981 FWS 800 $195,619 298 $276,087 320 $314,440 329 $292,779 345 $284,348 FSEOG 302 $308,225 731 $195,348 669 $195,348 592 $195,348 560 $195,348 LEAP/SSIG 62 $50,880 81 $53,489 98 $79,598 96 $97,323 202 $93,720 Pell $4,754,548 $5,110,810 2,472 $5,890,613 2,508 $6,386,092 2,566 $6,768,581 TOTAL $5,642,272 $5,906,269 $6,900,118 $7,425,397 $7,810,978 SNOW Perkins Loan 50 $102,282 72 $159,627 55 $118,836 31 $67,475 34 $67,773 FWS 471 $112,707 119 $112,283 138 $118,352 180 $134,428 176 $145,848 FSEOG 130 $124,849 406 $109,524 491 $118,723 439 $125,857 299 $109,520 LEAP/SSIG 136 $25,310 138 $29,643 158 $42,450 194 $51,699 151 $48,730 Pell $1,543,700 $2,319,641 1,292 $2,880,903 1,260 $2,960,918 1,194 $2,960,130 TOTAL $1,908,848 $2,730,718 $3,279,264 $3,340,377 $3,332,001 DIXIE Perkins Loan 142 $346,264 111 $315,586 145 $397,462 127 $387,762 226 $621,059 FWS 354 $166,664 130 $230,867 120 $262,714 104 $222,072 110 $227,682 FSEOG 105 $177,620 334 $153,200 288 $120,355 239 $125,647 275 $116,505 LEAP/SSIG 98 $31,080 98 $34,146 146 $50,692 130 $64,642 130 $64,120 Pell $2,610,123 $2,888,541 1,735 $3,718,515 1,942 $4,583,432 2,096 $4,995,181 TOTAL $3,331,751 $3,622,340 $4,549,738 $5,383,555 $6,024,547 CEU Perkins Loan 21 $42,775 39 $66,225 48 $82,900 44 $78,019 36 $67,570 FWS 105 $63,631 72 $72,467 72 $78,042 86 $100,371 82 $85,971 FSEOG 56 $71,032 82 $55,721 102 $72,175 177 $124,307 121 $64,624 LEAP/SSIG 36 $19,060 34 $19,936 53 $29,952 61 $35,359 73 $35,690 Pell $1,876,525 $2,023,162 1,141 $2,455,226 1,128 $2,789,691 1,051 $2,713,348 TOTAL $2,073,023 $2,237,511 $2,718,295 $3,127,747 $2,967,203 UVSC Perkins Loan 223 $291,265 143 $250,707 140 $306,471 142 $345,343 203 $502,854 FWS 729 $334,647 106 $245,880 298 $738,179 1,545 $967,091 450 $1,365,973 FSEOG 146 $315,112 381 $225,590 1,084 $725,137 459 $1,142,776 1,398 $910,560 LEAP/SSIG 460 $101,000 480 $112,271 627 $181,643 1,037 $233,825 854 $248,930 Pell $5,696,770 $8,586,945 6,147 $13,080,549 7,249 $16,789,102 8,104 $19,035,790 TOTAL $6,738,794 $9,421,393 $15,031,979 $19,478,137 $22,064,107 SLCC Perkins Loan 389 $680,022 538 $895,708 562 $883,909 545 $1,017,842 604 $1,177,418 FWS 839 $369,115 176 $317,127 166 $293,640 146 $334,811 188 $371,332 FSEOG 103 $215,809 959 $407,842 800 $317,990 679 $375,010 836 $476,103 LEAP/SSIG 329 $13,760 350 $135,136 363 $216,223 482 $261,125 474 $270,199 Pell $5,385,077 $6,493,457 4,728 $8,671,907 6,061 $12,174,964 6,860 $14,084,275 TOTAL $6,663,783 $8,249,270 $10,383,669 $14,163,752 $16,379,327 TOTAL Perkins Loan 4,133 $9,275,703 4,048 $10,217,397 3,987 $10,090,536 5,148 $13,496,866 5,975 $17,026,895 USHE FWS 6,908 $4,432,788 2,062 $4,007,492 2,229 $4,735,811 3,766 $5,818,000 2,628 $6,184,128 FSEOG 2,188 $3,677,124 5,823 $3,951,902 7,112 $4,797,958 6,405 $5,119,001 6,713 $4,278,805 LEAP/SSIG 2,060 $692,950 2,029 $834,786 2,728 $1,293,345 3,642 $1,607,930 3,479 $1,635,709 Pell $47,397,909 $55,867,709 34,016 $72,982,979 38,557 $89,143,328 40,849 $96,639,437 TOTAL $65,476,474 $74,879,286 $93,900,629 $115,185,125 $125,764,974

6 III. PROGRAM-BASED STUDENT FINANCIAL AID

INTRODUCTION

The following tables provide statistical information for program-based student financial aid programs administered by the Office of the Commissioner or USHE institutions. These programs are (1) the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE) exchange program, (2) the Regional Dental Education Program (RDEP), (3) the Terrel H. Bell Teaching Incentive Loans (TIL), (4) New Century Scholarships, (5) the Utah Engineering and Computer Science Loan Forgiveness Program (UECLP), (6) and institutionally-based Educationally Disadvantaged programs.

Program Description Western Interstate WICHE's Professional Student Exchange Program enables students in 12 Commission for western states to enroll in selected out-of-state professional programs when those Higher Education fields of study are not available at public institutions in their home state. (WICHE) Exchange students pay reduced levels of tuition and the state pays a support fee to the admitting schools to help cover the cost difference between resident and non-resident tuition. Regional Dental The Regional Dental Exchange Program (RDEP) enables 10 students each year Exchange Program to begin the study of dentistry. The first year of study is completed at the (RDEP) University of Utah School of Medicine. The final 3 years are completed through a contract with Creighton University, a private institution where students pay reduced tuition because of the RDEP contract. Beginning with the 2004 class, the RDEP program will function as a loan repayment program for students who are accepted to a School of Dentistry and the RDEP program if they return to Utah to practice dentistry after graduation. Terrel H. Bell The Terrel H. Bell Teaching Incentive Loan (TIL), (formerly the Utah Career Teaching Incentive Teaching Scholarship), is a state-funded program. For up to four years, TIL pays Loan (TIL) tuition and fees at the Utah public institutions of higher education and pays partial tuition costs at BYU and Westminster College. Recipients are required to pursue a teacher education program and to teach in Utah public or private schools for a period equal to the time they receive TIL assistance. If for some reason the recipient does not complete an education program and teach in a Utah public school, they are required to repay all TIL funds received with interest. New Century Created by the Legislature in 1999, the New Century Scholarship program Scholarships provides a state-funded 75 percent tuition scholarship for 60 credit hours of study at a public or private 4-year college or university in Utah to students who complete the requirements for an Associate’s degree by the September after their regular high school class would have graduated. All students who meet these requirements are eligible for the scholarship, though the amount of the award may be reduced or the number of awards capped because of funding limitations.

Program Description Utah Engineering and The Utah Engineering and Computer Science Loan Forgiveness Program Computer Science (UECLP) began in 2001 as part of the Engineering and Computer Science Loan Forgiveness initiative created by the legislature and governor. The program provides admitted Program (UECLP) engineering and computer science students with loans to cover educational costs and then promises to forgive the loans for each year the student is employed in Utah in engineering or computer science. Financial support for the forgiveness program has been limited to a one-time legislative appropriation. Educationally The Educationally Disadvantaged program is funded by line item appropriations to Disadvantaged 9 USHE institutions. The appropriations are to be used to support the educational needs of students who, because of their social-economic status or demographics, have historically been disadvantaged from pursuing a higher education. Funds may be spent on tuition assistance, counselors, advisors, or tutoring.

8 Table 4 Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE) Scholarships Awarded 94-95 95-96 96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Veterinary Medicine # of Awards 42 40 38 40 42 40 42 39 38 37 $ Amount $772,800 $772,000 $756,200 $733,672 $704,020 $682,983 $683,870 $705,019 $723,110 $716,750 Optometry # of Awards 6 8 8 10 12 13 16 16 15 14 $ Amount $38,933 $65,600 $67,200 $83,600 $104,650 $120,900 $152,000 $158,400 $154,500 $149,800 Podiatry # of Awards 12 778898553 $ Amount $99,600 $59,500 $61,600 $72,800 $75,000 $86,400 $78,400 $51,000 $53,000 $33,000 Administrative Fee # of Awards 79,000 79,000 79,000 81,000 83,000 85,000 88,000 99,000 103,000 110,000 TOTAL # of Awards 60 55 53 58 62 62 66 60 58 54 $ Amount $990,333 $976,100 $964,000 $971,072 $966,670 $975,283 $1,002,270 $1,013,419 $1,033,610 $1,009,550

Regional Dental Exchange Program (RDEP) Scholarships Awarded 94-95 95-96 96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 State Appropriation # of Awards 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 40 $ Amount$ 444,300 $ 460,593 $ 484,893 $ 509,100 $ 514,100 $ 558,200 $ 549,400 $ 573,900 $ 561,700 $ 555,400

Notes: (1) The Student Exchange Program administered through the Western Insterstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE) and the Regional Dental Education Program (RDEP) assist Utah students in obtaining training in dentistry, veterinary medicine, optometry and podiatry under the interstate compact. Participating students pay resident tuition and general fees of the receiving state or reduced tuition at private institutions. The chart above is a summary of Utah's participation in these programs.

(1) RDEP assists Utah students obtain training in dentistry through a contract with Creighton University. Participating students begin studying at the University of Utah School of Medicine and then receive reduced tuition at the private institution. Beginning with the 2004 class, students who study at other institutions may receive partial loan forgiveness if they return to Utah to practice.

9 Table 5 USHE Terrel H. Bell Teaching Incentive Loan (TIL) (1) 1994-95 Through 2003-04 SUMMER FALL WINTER SPRING TOTAL WAIVERS Awardees $ Expended Awardees $ Expended Awardees $ Expended Awardees $ Expended $ Expended 1994-95 110 $39,228 339 $225,509 297 $198,869 263 $161,700 $625,306 1995-96 90 $49,895 326 $222,228 254 $166,733 286 $195,153 $634,009 1996-97 76 $49,229 321 $226,867 282 $197,449 236 $155,210 $628,755 1997-98 90 $58,423 318 $237,884 287 $204,525 242 $168,032 $668,864 1998-99 158 $62,604 328 $353,132 0 $0 318 $319,563 $735,299 1999-00 123 $48,576 344 $362,279 0 $0 297 $337,163 $748,018 2000-01 47 $42,047 373 $416,557 0 $0 318 $355,481 $814,085 2001-02 82 $84,782 355 $448,880 0 $0 326 $386,073 $919,735 2002-03 60 $69,938 282 $365,115 0 $0 247 $320,652 $755,705 2003-04 78 $112,872 332 $479,801 0 $0 291 $420,354 $1,013,027 SUMMER FALL WINTER SPRING TOTAL STIPENDS Awardees $ Expended Awardees $ Expended Awardees $ Expended Awardees $ Expended $ Expended 1993-94 8 $4,000 85 $42,231 96 $47,853 $46,000 $140,084 1994-95 to 0$00$00$0 $0$0 2003-04 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 $0 PREMIER SUMMER FALL WINTER SPRING TOTAL AWARDS Awardees $ Expended Awardees $ Expended Awardees $ Expended Awardees $ Expended $ Expended 1994-95 2 $1,500 20 $21,500 17 $17,500 13 $13,000 $53,500 1995-96 2 $2,000 18 $18,000 16 $16,500 14 $14,000 $50,500 1996-97 1 $1,000 17 $17,500 15 $15,000 16 $16,000 $49,500 1997-98 0 $0 20 $22,500 21 $23,500 13 $13,000 $59,000 1998-99 0 $0 9 $13,500 0 $0 14 $21,000 $34,500 1999-00 0 $0 7 $10,500 0 $0 15 $15,000 $25,500 2000-01 0 $0 13 $19,500 0 $0 18 $24,000 $43,500 2001-02 0 $0 19 $27,000 0 $0 12 $18,000 $45,000 2002-03 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 2003-04 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 0 $0 $0 TOTAL SUMMER FALL WINTER SPRING TOTAL AWARDS Awardees $ Expended Awardees $ Expended Awardees $ Expended Awardees $ Expended $ Expended 1994-95 112 $40,728 359 $247,009 314 $216,369 276 $174,700 $678,806 1995-96 92 $51,895 344 $240,228 270 $183,233 300 $209,153 $684,509 1996-97 77 $50,229 338 $244,367 297 $212,449 252 $171,210 $678,255 1997-98 90 $58,423 338 $260,384 308 $228,025 255 $181,032 $727,864 1998-99 158 $62,604 337 $366,632 0 $0 332 $340,563 $769,799 1999-00 123 $48,576 351 $372,779 0 $0 312 $352,163 $773,518 2000-01 47 $42,047 386 $436,057 0 $0 336 $379,481 $857,585 2001-02 82 $84,782 374 $475,880 0 $0 338 $404,073 $964,735 2002-03 60 $69,938 282 $365,115 0 $0 247 $320,652 $755,705 2003-04 78 $112,872 332 $479,801 0 $0 291 $420,354 $1,013,027 Administrative Total (2) Other Support Costs Expenditures 1994-95 $40,117 $718,923 1995-96 $56,000 $740,509 1996-97 $57,000 $735,255 1997-98 $60,198 $788,062 1998-99 $71,378 $841,177 1999-00 $71,059 $844,577 2000-01 $73,000 $930,585 2001-02 $118,887 $1,083,622 2002-03 $128,196 1 $883,901 2003-04 $117,236 $1,130,263 Notes: (1) The Terrel H. Bell Teaching Incentive Loan (TIL) is designed to encourage outstanding student to pursue careers as teachers. The program is open to students enrolled in a program of study leading to teacher certification in a state-supported college or university, Brigham Young University, or Westminster College. Up to 365 students are awarded tuition and general fee waivers. In addition, up to 20 TIL recipients receive a Premier award of $1,000 per quarter/$1,500 per semester. The $500 stipend was discontinued 7/94. All Premier and Stipend awards are given only to TIL recipients, thus the numbers are included in the recipient "Total", otherwise, there would be duplication of numbers. (2) Administrative costs for 2002-03 include one-time expenditures of $27,000 for hardware/software and a $7,000 reimbursement.

10 Table 6 New Century Scholarship Program 99-00 2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 Number of New Scholarships Granted (1) 14 50 79 130 145 Amount of Scholarships Awarded (2) $13,515 $86,099 $126,049 $230,732 $368,519 Notes:

(1) The number of scholarships granted represents all new awardees who meet the eligibility criteria. Students may choose to defer awards, as they receive 5 years to utilize the scholarship. (2) The amount of scholarships awarded includes funding for new and on going participants. 12.20.04

Table 7 Participation in the Utah Engineering and Computer Science Loan Forgiveness Program (UECLP) Data for $500,000 One-time Appropriation from 2001-02 (as of November 2004)

# of Principle Forgiveness Payments (1) # of Payment (2) Institution and Program Category Awardees Value 2002-03 2003-04 Total Recipients (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (f) (g) University of Utah 28 $149,210 $9,420 $31,550 $40,970 13 Engineering 23 Computer Science 5 Related Fields 0 Utah State University 41 $208,350 $18,592 $29,511 $48,103 18 Engineering 29 Computer Science 10 Related Fields 2 Weber State University 30 $88,470 $27,298 $7,046 $34,344 15 Engineering 1 Computer Science 23 Related Fields 6 Southern Utah University 13 $25,650 $6,739 $6,978 $13,717 6 Engineering 1 Computer Science 1 Related Fields 11 Utah Valley State College 9 $18,320 $9,664 $0 $9,664 5 Engineering 0 Computer Science 4 Related Fields 5 Dixie State College of Utah 4 $10,000 $1,600 $1,623 $3,223 2 Engineering 0 Computer Science 0 Related Fields 4 TOTAL ALL INSTITUTIONS 125 $500,000 $73,313 $76,708 $150,021 59 Engineering 54 Computer Science 43 Related Fields 28 Notes: (1) Payments represent the sum of principle and applicable interest paid. (2) Only partial year reported for calendar year 2003-04. More activity is anticipated.

11 Table 8 USHE Educationally Disadvantaged Programs

Utilization of Funds for Eligible Purposes Producitivity Measures Budget Budget Expenditure Category 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 Measure 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 University of Utah Scholarships - General $187,216 $201,354 $199,333 $201,300 Students receiving general scholarships 606 694 628 625 Scholarships - Minority Students 32,990 37,547 36,772 39,500 Average per student $309 $290 $317 $322 Tutoring 76,019 77,593 96,604 88,100 Minority students receiving scholarships 109 109 99 110 Counseling 328,495 363,375 479,527 411,000 Average per minority student $303 $344 $371 $359 Total Expenditures $624,720 $679,869 $812,236 $739,900 Utah State University Scholarships - General $16,728 $14,400 $21,981 $22,000 Students receiving general scholarships 108 16 52 50 Scholarships - Minority Students 78,355 63,068 54,220 51,200 Average per student $155 $900 $423 $440 Tutoring 3,000 826 1,650 2,000 Minority students receiving scholarships 89 88 37 35 Counseling 145,459 150,919 102,993 156,600 Average per minority student $880 $717 $1,465 $1,464 Total Expenditures $243,542 $229,213 $180,844 $231,800 Weber State University Scholarships - General $0 $0 $0 $0 Students receiving general scholarships 0000 Scholarships - Minority Students 0000Average per student $0 $0 $0 $0 Tutoring 69,165 51,376 53,731 43,479 Minority students receiving scholarships 0000 Counseling 287,064 244,766 300,790 285,221 Average per minority student $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenditures $356,229 $296,142 $354,521 $328,700 Southern Utah University Scholarships - General $22,400 $22,300 $20,000 $12,300 Students receiving general scholarships 26 28 15 10 Scholarships - Minority Students 1,787 3,613 17,731 10,000 Average per student $862 $796 $1,333 $1,230 Tutoring 1,731 3,465 4,718 6,500 Minority students receiving scholarships 6 10 37 20 Counseling 61,958 58,881 57,710 63,600 Average per minority student $298 $361 $479 $500 Total Expenditures $87,876 $88,259 $100,159 $92,400 Snow College Scholarships - General $33,800 $32,300 $32,000 $32,000 Students receiving general scholarships 152 125 125 150 Scholarships - Minority Students 1,645 5,215 4,500 4,500 Average per student $222 $258 $256 $213 Tutoring 0000Minority students receiving scholarships 7 16 16 15 Counseling 0000Average per minority student $235 $326 $281 $300 Total Expenditures $35,445 $37,515 $36,500 $36,500 Dixie State College Scholarships - General $24,000 $27,000 $25,600 $25,000 Students receiving general scholarships 92 75 53 53 Scholarships - Minority Students 7,700 4,400 5,600 5,600 Average per student $261 $360 $483 $472 Tutoring 0000Minority students receiving scholarships 18 21 15 15 Counseling 0000Average per minority student $428 $210 $373 $373 Total Expenditures $31,700 $31,400 $31,200 $30,600 College of Eastern Utah Scholarships - General $96,244 $93,554 $98,543 $97,033 Students receiving general scholarships 0000 Scholarships - Minority Students 0000Average per student $0 $0 $0 $0 Tutoring 0000Minority students receiving scholarships 0000 Counseling 26,325 22,963 30,045 20,367 Average per minority student $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenditures $122,569 $116,517 $128,588 $117,400 Utah Valley State College Scholarships - General $0 $0 $0 $0 Students receiving general scholarships 0000 Scholarships - Minority Students 0000Average per student $0 $0 $0 $0 Tutoring 13,767 18,483 15,317 15,500 Minority students receiving scholarships 0000 Counseling 115,640 113,717 116,083 118,500 Average per minority student $0 $0 $0 $0 Total Expenditures $129,407 $132,200 $131,400 $134,000 Salt Lake Community College Scholarships - General $169,100 $161,220 $134,047 $160,400 Students receiving general scholarships 320 297 288 290 Scholarships - Minority Students 13,937 16,016 10,098 18,000 Average per student $528 $543 $465 $553 Tutoring 0000Minority students receiving scholarships 32 34 28 35 Counseling 0000Average per minority student $436 $471 $361 $514 Total Expenditures $183,037 $177,236 $144,145 $178,400 Utah System of Higher Education Scholarships - General $549,488 $552,128 $531,504 $550,033 Students receiving general scholarships 1,304 1,235 1,161 1,178 Scholarships - Minority Students 136,414 129,859 128,921 128,800 Average per student $421 $447 $458 $467 Tutoring 163,682 151,743 172,020 155,579 Minority students receiving scholarships 261 278 232 230 Counseling 964,941 954,621 1,087,148 1,055,288 Average per minority student $523 $467 $556 $560 Total Expenditures $1,814,525 $1,788,351 $1,919,593 $1,889,700

12 IV. FEDERAL FAMILY EDUCATION LOAN PROGRAM

INTRODUCTION

The Federal Family Education Loan Program (FFELP) currently makes four types of long-term, low interest loans available for students and the parents of students enrolled in eligible postsecondary education institutions. The four current loan types, described below, are: Federal Stafford Loans (subsidized and unsubsidized), Federal Parental Loans for Undergraduate Students (PLUS), and Federal Consolidation Loans. FFELP loans are made primarily by commercial lenders and are insured against loss by designated guaranty agencies and reinsured by the Federal Government. In Utah, Consolidation Loans are made directly by the State secondary market for student loans.

FFELP is the largest single source of student financial assistance in the nation. For the federal fiscal year 2003 national FFELP loan volume totaled $32.6 billion consisting of approximately 8.5 million loans.

UTAH STUDENT LOAN PROGRAM

The Utah Higher Education Assistance Authority (UHEAA) is the designated guaranty agency in Utah. The tables on the following pages describe the loan volume and related statistics for loans guaranteed by UHEAA’s Student Loan Guarantee Program (LGP).

BASIC PROGRAM PROVISIONS

A summary of the basic provisions for each of the FFELP loan programs is provided below: Program Description Federal The Federal Stafford Loan Program, named in honor of former Senator Robert Stafford, Stafford Loans provides both subsidized and unsubsidized loans according to an individual student's financial need. For Subsidized Stafford Loan borrowers who demonstrate financial need, the federal government subsidizes (pays) the interest accruing while the student remains in school and during a six month "grace" period. A student who does not qualify for the maximum amount through a subsidized loan may obtain the additional funding within the authorized loan limit through an unsubsidized Stafford Loan. Interest on unsubsidized Stafford Loans during school and grace periods may either be paid as accrued or capitalized and added to the loan principal, at the borrower's option. Eligible students in an independent status may borrow up to the following loan amounts per year: Subsidized Unsubsidized First-Year Undergraduates $2,625 $4,000 Second-Year Undergraduates $3,000 $4,000 Third-Year & Remaining Undergraduates $5,500 $5,000 Graduate Students $8,500 $10,000 The cumulative loan limit for independent undergraduate study is $46,000. The cumulative loan limit for undergraduate and graduate study combined is $138,500. The interest rate is variable, based on the June 1 Treasury Bill rate, but does not exceed 8.25 %. For 07/01/04 to 06/30/05, the interest rate for loans in repayment is 3.37 %. Interest rates are adjusted each year on July 1. Borrowers are notified of interest rate changes through out the life of the loan.

Program Description Federal The maximum repayment period, which begins six months after the student is no longer Stafford Loans attending school on at least a half-time basis, is generally ten years. For first time (continued) borrowers on or after 10/7/98, with debt in excess of $30,000, the maximum repayment period is extended to 25 years. Federal PLUS Federal PLUS Loans (for parents of undergraduate students) provide favorable interest Loans rates and are available for the student’s cost of attendance remaining after deducting other financial aid. The interest rate could change each year of repayment, based on the June 1 Treasury Bill rate but does not exceed 9 %. For 07/01/04 to 06/30/05 the interest rate for PLUS loans in repayment is 4.17 %. Repayment on Federal PLUS Loans begins when the loan is made and extends over a maximum 10-year period, with possible extensions for approved deferments and forbearance. Federal Federal Consolidation Loans allow borrowers to consolidate all student loans into one, Consolidation extend the repayment period and keep monthly payments more manageable. For Loans Consolidation Loan applications received on or after 10/1/98, the interest rate is a fixed rate based on the weighted average of the interest rates of the loans being consolidated, rounded up to the nearest 1/8 of a percent, not to exceed 8.25%. Repayment on a Federal Consolidation Loan begins when the loan is first disbursed. The length of the repayment period varies depending on the beginning balance of the Consolidation loan plus the borrower’s other education loans, with maximum repayment periods ranging from 10 years to 30 years.

COHORT DEFAULT RATES In June 1989, the U.S. Department of Education (ED) implemented a default reduction initiative to combat defaults in the FFEL Program. Under ED's default reduction plan, a "cohort" default rate is calculated and published for each participating school. Schools with default rates above specified percentages are subject to various sanctions or limitations. ED also began to publish informational cohort default rates for guaranty agencies and lenders, beginning with federal fiscal year 1991.

The cohort default rate is determined by the number of borrowers who entered repayment in the same year and by tracking this "cohort" group over a specified interval of time to determine the percentage of such borrowers who default. The formula for determining the fiscal 2002 cohort default rates is as follows:

# of Borrowers who Entered Repayment in Fiscal Year 2002 and Defaulted on or before the end of Fiscal 2003 # of Borrowers who Entered Repayment in Fiscal Year 20021

The cohort default rates are calculated from data supplied by guaranty agencies through the National Student Loan Data System process as directed by ED. Only Subsidized Federal Stafford, Unsubsidized Federal Stafford, and Federal 1SLS Program Loans which qualify for federal reinsurance are included in the cohort default rate calculations. The formula described above is used to determine cohort default rates for schools with 30 or more borrowers entering repayment in fiscal 2002. For schools with fewer than 30 borrowers entering repayment in fiscal 2001 the cohort default rate is the average of the rates calculated for the three most recent fiscal years. Schools which have operated less than three years are considered too new for a meaningful rate to be calculated.

For 2002, UHEAA's cohort default rate (covering experience for all participating schools and lenders) was 2.79% which ranked 6th lowest nationally. The national average for all programs was 5.2%.

1 Federal SLS Loans have not been made since 1994. However, it is possible for a Federal SLS loan to be included in cohort default rate calculations under certain circumstances. 2 Source College Board trends in student aid 2004, Table 4

14 Table 9 UHEAA Gurantees Annual Volume for each Fiscal Year Ending June 30

1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 # of # of # of # of # of # of Loans Dollar Amount Loans Dollar Amount Loans Dollar Amount Loans Dollar Amount Loans Dollar Amount # of Loans Dollar Amount Loans Dollar Amount Federal Subsidized Stafford Loan Program 6,985 $15,981,493 12,964 $25,575,825 33,622 $37,033,481 22,592 $39,821,972 18,805 $40,106,911 19,652 $40,133,772 20,722 $44,517,890 Federal SLS Program 1 $3,000 28 $76,857 185 $480,054 Federal Unsubsidized Stafford Loan Program Federal Consolidation Program Federal PLUS Program 20 $41,296 34 $83,670 77 $203,465 Total All Federal Student Loan Program 6,985 $15,981,493 12,964 $25,575,825 33,622 $37,033,481 22,592 $39,821,972 18,826 $40,151,207 19,714 $40,294,299 20,984 $45,201,409

1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 # of # of # of # of # of # of Loans Dollar Amount Loans Dollar Amount Loans Dollar Amount Loans Dollar Amount Loans Dollar Amount # of Loans Dollar Amount Loans Dollar Amount Federal Subsidized Stafford Loan Program 21,265 $48,781,338 20,554 $50,795,877 22,142 $61,649,603 25,229 $70,115,989 27,340 $78,470,686 31,152 $90,834,792 34,578 $101,441,767 Federal SLS Program 228 $601,334 335 $846,103 650 $1,929,681 948 $2,688,525 1,267 $3,620,734 2,444 $6,841,211 4,075 $11,352,251 Federal Unsubsidized Stafford Loan Program Federal Consolidation Program 178 $2,697,880 285 $3,923,880 337 $4,758,842 348 $5,177,110 472 $7,042,012 Federal PLUS Program 128 $339,350 122 $332,651 201 $563,959 300 $884,405 409 $1,246,942 881 $2,703,773 1,188 $3,673,939 Total All Federal Student Loan Program 21,621 $49,722,022 21,011 $51,974,631 23,171 $66,841,123 26,762 $77,612,799 29,353 $88,097,204 34,825 $105,556,886 40,313 $123,509,969

1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 # of # of # of # of # of # of Loans Dollar Amount Loans Dollar Amount Loans Dollar Amount Loans Dollar Amount Loans Dollar Amount # of Loans Dollar Amount Loans Dollar Amount Federal Subsidized Stafford Loan Program 36,286 $106,901,051 38,618 $129,958,518 39,363 $139,517,145 38,950 $139,765,515 38,719 $139,492,572 40,894 $143,937,178 39,312 $137,038,124 Federal SLS Program 5,231 $15,141,095 4,823 $15,505,942 29 $64,220 Federal Unsubsidized Stafford Loan Program 858 $1,921,342 2,924 $7,720,092 12,595 $41,873,682 12,567 $41,518,916 13,627 $45,975,806 15,498 $52,809,300 15,948 $55,395,040 Federal Consolidation Program 289 $5,971,420 741 $13,602,362 1,323 $22,021,231 1,853 $28,618,203 1,591 $29,900,892 1,203 $30,591,027 2,094 $50,245,855 Federal PLUS Program 1,254 $4,045,349 823 $3,347,315 845 $4,071,037 814 $4,051,511 805 $4,065,337 1,127 $5,831,003 1,152 $5,968,887 Total All Federal Student Loan Program 43,918 $133,980,257 47,929 $170,134,229 54,155 $207,547,315 54,184 $213,954,145 54,742 $219,434,607 58,722 $233,168,508 58,506 $248,647,906

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Total # of # of # of # of # of # of Loans Dollar Amount Loans Dollar Amount Loans Dollar Amount Loans Dollar Amount Loans Dollar Amount Loans Dollar Amount Federal Subsidized Stafford Loan Program 37,630 $129,675,998 42,213 $140,041,084 45,765 $140,521,773 52,540 $161,042,658 59,383 $182,299,120 827,275 2,435,452,132 Federal SLS Program 20,244 59,151,007 Federal Unsubsidized Stafford Loan Program 17,665 $61,039,720 20,062 $69,041,163 21,613 $69,935,190 26,079 $84,235,161 29,637 $93,892,986 189,073 625,358,398 Federal Consolidation Program 1,653 $43,630,243 1,424 $40,002,288 2,549 $68,386,041 5,763 $141,308,718 7,559 $166,566,027 29,662 664,444,031 Federal PLUS Program 1,182 $6,411,438 1,138 $6,567,084 1,064 $6,037,619 1,299 $7,836,390 1,746 $11,220,200 16,609 79,526,620 Total All Federal Student Loan Program 58,130 $240,757,399 64,837 $255,651,619 70,991 $284,880,623 85,681 $394,422,927 98,325 $453,978,333 1,082,863 3,863,932,188

FY 2004 totals as of November 2004

15 Table 10 UHEAA Guarantees by Lender Federal Subsidized Stafford, Unsubsidized Stafford, and PLUS Loan Programs Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2004

Number of Dollar % of Total Lender Loans Amount Dollar Volume

Alliance Credit Union 1 $896 0.00% America First Credit Union 8,932 $28,327,442 9.86% Bank One, Western Region 5,013 $15,084,785 5.25% Deseret First Credit Union 1,053 $3,394,405 1.18% Family First Credit Union 686 $1,951,917 0.68% Granite District Credit Union 511 $1,769,718 0.62% Jordan Credit Union 465 $1,544,313 0.54% Key Bank 3,308 $10,017,375 3.49% Mountain America Credit Union 5,255 $17,381,238 6.05% Mountain High Credit Union 1 $1,313 0.00% Salt Lake City Credit Union 203 $582,408 0.20% Tooele Credit Union 384 $1,080,995 0.38% University of Utah Credit Union 2,267 $9,267,641 3.22% U.S. Bank 5,934 $17,665,264 6.15% USU Community Credit Union 495 $1,701,397 0.59% Utah Community Credit Union 4,025 $13,030,266 4.53% Washington Mutual, Inc. 8,736 $28,087,400 9.77% Weber State Federal Credit Union 621 $1,467,625 0.51% Wells Fargo Bank 23,175 $72,514,408 25.23% Zions First National Bank 19,701 $62,541,500 21.76% TOTAL ALL LENDERS 90,766 287,412,306 100.00%

16 Table 11 UHEAA Guarantees by Institution Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 2004 Parental Loans for Subsidized Stafford Unsubsidized Stafford Total Stafford Undergraduate Students Total Stafford and PLUS Loan Loan Program Loan Program Loan Program (PLUS) Programs Combined # of $ % of $ # of $ % of $ # of $ % of $ # of $ % of $ # of $ % of $ Institution Loans Amount Amount Loans Amount Amount Loans Amount Amount Loans Amount Amount Loans Amount Amount American Inst of Med/Dental 362 $789,898 0.43% 291 $696,387 0.74% 653 $1,486,285 0.54% 61 $311,064 2.77% 714 1,797,349 0.63% (Provo, St. George) Beau La Reine College of Bty 25 $63,288 0.03% 15 $48,375 0.05% 40 $111,663 0.04% 0 $0 0.00% 40 111,663 0.04% Bon Losee Acad. Hair Artistry 97 $202,941 0.11% 60 $143,634 0.15% 157 $346,575 0.13% 12 $77,682 0.69% 169 424,257 0.15%

Brigham Young University 8,188 $30,934,223 16.97% 4,045 $12,962,827 13.81% 12,233 $43,897,050 15.89% 212 $1,310,472 11.68% 12,445 45,207,522 15.73% College of Eastern Utah 235 $501,726 0.28% 63 $139,156 0.15% 298 $640,882 0.23% 1 $1,778 0.02% 299 642,660 0.22% Dixie State College 910 $1,811,295 0.99% 624 $1,226,449 1.31% 1,534 $3,037,744 1.10% 10 $36,277 0.32% 1,544 3,074,021 1.07% Eagle Gate College 537 $1,227,128 0.67% 555 $1,341,047 1.43% 1,092 $2,568,175 0.93% 38 $139,011 1.24% 1,130 2,707,186 0.94% Evans Hairstyling College 14 $33,309 0.02% 5 $12,600 0.01% 19 $45,909 0.02% 2 $13,000 0.12% 21 58,909 0.02% (Cedar City) Fran Brown College of Beauty 62 $133,907 0.07% 38 $120,707 0.13% 100 $254,614 0.09% 11 $57,300 0.51% 111 311,914 0.11% Francois D. Hair Design 65 $147,391 0.08% 48 $119,033 0.13% 113 $266,424 0.10% 1 $4,430 0.04% 114 270,854 0.09% Hairitage College of Beauty 4 $10,500 0.01% 0 $0 0.00% 4 $10,500 0.00% 0 $0 0.00% 4 10,500 0.00% Healing Mn. Massage School 30 $73,711 0.04% 28 $89,722 0.10% 58 $163,433 0.06% 0 $0 0.00% 58 163,433 0.06% International Institute of Hair 33 $67,985 0.04% 13 $35,610 0.04% 46 $103,595 0.04% 1 $3,500 0.03% 47 107,095 0.04% Design (Taylorsville) ITT Technical Institute 2 $6,667 0.00% 3 $7,374 0.01% 5 $14,041 0.01% 0 $0 0.00% 5 14,041 0.00% LDS Business College 359 $696,824 0.38% 124 $265,575 0.28% 483 $962,399 0.35% 2 $18,386 0.16% 485 980,785 0.34% Mountain West College 31 $72,662 0.04% 31 $72,958 0.08% 62 $145,620 0.05% 0 $0 0.00% 62 145,620 0.05% Myotherapy Institute of Utah 98 $206,547 0.11% 85 $246,414 0.26% 183 $452,961 0.16% 11 $50,426 0.45% 194 503,387 0.18% Northface University 73 $188,125 0.10% 47 $183,006 0.19% 120 $371,131 0.13% 5 $92,404 0.82% 125 463,535 0.16% Ogden Institute of Massage 4 $10,500 0.01% 4 $16,000 0.02% 8 $26,500 0.01% 0 $0 0.00% 8 26,500 0.01% Paul Mitchell The School* 138 $326,786 0.18% 48 $156,892 0.17% 186 $483,678 0.18% 27 $204,290 1.82% 213 687,968 0.24% Provo College 797 $1,833,521 1.01% 708 $1,843,714 1.96% 1,505 $3,677,235 1.33% 97 $411,767 3.67% 1,602 4,089,002 1.42% Salt Lake Community College 3,451 $6,710,146 3.68% 1,147 $2,291,645 2.44% 4,598 $9,001,791 3.26% 6 $33,932 0.30% 4,604 9,035,723 3.14% Sherman Kendall's Acad. Bty 20 $47,751 0.03% 6 $15,750 0.02% 26 $63,501 0.02% 0 $0 0.00% 26 63,501 0.02% Arts( 2 campuses) Skinworks School of Advanced 23 $36,750 0.02% 24 $50,783 0.05% 47 $87,533 0.03% 6 $20,101 0.18% 53 107,634 0.04% Skincare Snow College 510 $983,036 0.54% 179 $360,262 0.38% 689 $1,343,298 0.49% 37 $115,450 1.03% 726 1,458,748 0.51% Southern Utah University 1,973 $6,058,908 3.32% 468 $1,121,981 1.19% 2,441 $7,180,889 2.60% 27 $148,659 1.32% 2,468 7,329,548 2.55% Stacey's Hands of Champions 13 $34,873 0.02% 0 $0 0.00% 13 $34,873 0.01% 0 $0 0.00% 13 34,873 0.01% Stevens Henager Colleges 2,354 $7,227,012 3.96% 1,950 $6,956,304 7.41% 4,304 $14,183,316 5.14% 87 $625,144 5.57% 4,391 14,808,460 5.15% (SLC, Ogden, Provo, Bountiful, Providence) University of Phoenix 1,063 $4,889,120 2.68% 1,089 $5,274,815 5.62% 2,152 $10,163,935 3.68% 0 $0 0.00% 2,152 10,163,935 3.54% University of Utah 9,420 $39,157,914 21.48% 5,086 $20,754,745 22.10% 14,506 $59,912,659 21.69% 124 $1,134,461 10.11% 14,630 61,047,120 21.24% Utah College of Massage 1,173 $2,356,305 1.29% 1,019 $2,885,567 3.07% 2,192 $5,241,872 1.90% 227 $1,465,644 13.06% 2,419 6,707,516 2.33% Therapy (SLC, Provo)** Utah State University 6,555 $21,987,984 12.06% 2,467 $7,110,365 7.57% 9,022 $29,098,349 10.54% 149 $945,165 8.42% 9,171 30,043,514 10.45% Utah Valley State College 7,414 $17,435,487 9.56% 2,980 $7,166,613 7.63% 10,394 $24,602,100 8.91% 86 $420,443 3.75% 10,480 25,022,543 8.71% Weber State University 3,857 $8,910,593 4.89% 890 $1,997,378 2.13% 4,747 $10,907,971 3.95% 46 $237,990 2.12% 4,793 11,145,961 3.88% Westminster College 1,655 $7,048,861 3.87% 1,234 $5,746,635 6.12% 2,889 $12,795,496 4.63% 50 $391,402 3.49% 2,939 13,186,898 4.59% TOTAL UTAH SCHOOLS 51,545 $162,223,674 88.99% 25,374 $81,460,323 86.76% 76,919 $243,683,997 88.23% 1,336 $8,270,178 73.71% 78,255 251,954,175 87.66% OUT OF STATE SCHOOLS 7,838 $20,075,446 11.01% 4,263 $12,432,663 13.24% 12,101 $32,508,109 11.77% 410 $2,950,022 26.29% 12,511 $35,458,131 12.34% GRAND TOTAL 59,383 $182,299,120 100.00% 29,637 $93,892,986 100.00% 89,020 $276,192,106 100.00% 1,746 $11,220,200 100.00% 90,766 $287,412,306 100.00%

* Paul Mitchell is a Utah affiliated school with three additional campuses in California, Florida, and Rhode Island. This table only includes guarantees from its Provo campu ** UCMT is a Utah affiliated school with additional campuses in CO, NV, and AZ. This table only includes guarantees from SLC and Provo campuses. 17 FY 2004 totals as of November 2004

V. UTAH STATE BOARD OF REGENTS LOAN PURCHASE PROGRAM

The Student Loan Purchase Program was formed in 1977 for the purpose of making loans to, and purchasing the loans of, qualified students attending eligible institutions of higher education. The Program, which began operations in January 1979, provides a secondary market for student loans which are guaranteed by the Utah Higher Education Assistance Authority (UHEAA) and originated by Utah lenders.

At the present time, 20 Utah lenders are originating student loans guaranteed by UHEAA. Of these 20 lenders, all 20 participate in the Board's secondary market activities and sell their loans to the Loan Purchase Program at or prior to the time the borrower leaves school and begins repayment.

In October 1987, the Loan Purchase Program also began originating consolidation loans which provides a borrower with the opportunity to combine eligible types of outstanding student loan debts into one, new consolidation loan. Through a consolidation loan, a borrower is able to make a single monthly payment and can generally lower the amount of the monthly payment over the extended repayment period. Following is a table of student loans purchased and originated by the Loan Purchase Program since 1979:

Table 12

Year Ending Loans Consolidation Year Ending Loans Consolidation June 30 Purchased Loans Originated June 30 Purchased Loans Originated 1979 21,320,674 1992 54,168,658 7,042,012 1980 25,048,084 1993 74,244,960 5,971,420 1981 3,984,461 1994 84,119,891 13,602,362 1982 21,366,185 1995 173,243,574 22,021,231 1983 48,340,963 1996 123,861,615 28,618,203 1984 40,475,239 1997 119,357,471 28,349,480 1985 18,773,146 1998 134,072,443 30,362,067 1986 32,062,783 1999 143,436,847 51,109,531 1987 29,581,200 2000 161,432,463 42,830,086 1988 30,241,627 2,697,880 2001 186,784,047 44,149,141 1989 35,549,411 3,923,880 2002 164,073,554 65,382,309 1990 38,570,030 4,758,842 2003 197,074,435 142,120,365 1991 54,916,532 5,177,110 2004 251,125,021 176,025,933

TOTAL 2,267,225,314 674,141,852

On June 30, 2004 the Loan Purchase Program's portfolio of student loans consisted of 123,076 borrowers with an aggregate outstanding balance totaling $1,244,918,124. The student loan portfolio is financed through tax exempt and taxable student loan revenue bonds issued by the Board of Regents. At June 30, 2004, there were $914,120,000 of tax exempt bonds and $472,100,000 of taxable bonds outstanding. These bonds are secured by the assets of the Program and are not liabilities of the State of Utah.

VI. STATUTORY TUITION WAIVERS

For the 2004-05 year, Utah Code authorizes or requires USHE institutions to provide 16 different general types of tuition waivers for students who meet certain eligibility criteria. A general description of the different waivers, along with citations of applicable state law and Regent policy, is provided below, with detail in the table that follows of the waiver amounts by institution over the last five years.

Waiver Description Resident 10 Percent All or part of the tuition for meritorious or impecunious (need-based) students may Meritorious or be waived by the president of each institution up to an amount not to exceed 10 Impecunious Waivers percent of the total tuition which would have been collected from all Utah resident students at the institution without the waiver (UCA 53B-8-101(1)(a); R513-3.1.). Resident National Of the amount waived for resident students, 2.5 percent of the total amount Guard Waiver Set waived is set aside for members of the Utah National Guard (UCA 53B-8- Aside 101(1)(b); R513-3.1.1.). Meritorious All or part of the resident portion of tuition may be waived for one year for Non-resident meritorious non-resident students who do not currently receive a waiver. Statute Undergraduate specifies the number of waivers per institution. The resident portion of tuition may Waivers continue to be waived for these students after the first year. In addition, after the first-year the non-resident portion of tuition may also be waived. The non-resident portion may also be waived for a calculated number of first-year students, depending on the ratio of non-resident to resident students enrolled (UCA 53B-8- 101(2); R513-3.2.). Critical Occupations Full or partial waivers may be provided to encourage students to enroll in Waivers occupations critical to the state for which trained personnel are in short supply. Regents must approve which occupations. These waivers have not been granted (UCA 53B-8-101(3); R-513-3.4.). Senior Citizen Utah residents age 62 and over may enroll on a space available audit basis in Waivers classes without regular tuition charges. A minimum administrative fee for registration, record keeping, and reporting of at least $10 should be charged. To receive credit a senior citizen must pay regular tuition (UCA 53B-9; R-513-6). Meritorious All or part of the difference between resident and nonresident tuition may be Non-resident waived for meritorious graduate students (UCA 53-B-101.(4); R513-3.6.). Graduate Waivers Western The Western Undergraduate Exchange (WUE) program enables students from 12 Undergraduate participating states to enroll in selected programs in other states at 150 percent of Exchange the resident tuition. WUE students are only accepted in under-enrolled programs, as determined by each institution. Enrollment under the WUE program may not count toward residency status. Regent policy allocates 900 WUE waivers across USHE institutions (UCA 53B-8-103; R513-7.). Reciprocal The board may enter into agreements with other states to provide for a full or Agreements partial reciprocal waiver of the nonresident tuition differential charged to undergraduate students (UCA 53B-8-103; R513-4.).

Waiver Description Border Waivers Up to half of the nonresident portion of tuition may be waived for a nonresident student who has not previously enrolled in a USHE institution, who enrolls for ten or more credit hours, and whose legal domicile is within 100 highway miles of the USHE institution of enrollment. Four-hundred of these waivers are allocated to USHE institutions by Regent policy (UCA 53B-8-104; R513-5.). Police or Firefighter This waiver is for each Utah resident child and surviving spouse of a Utah peace Survivor Waivers officer or Utah firefighter killed in the line of duty, for up to 9 semesters as long as tuition is not covered by any other source (UCA 53B-8c; R513-8.). Wards of the State Wards of the state receive a tuition waiver from a USHE institution for up to 9 Tuition Waiver semesters as long as tuition is not covered by any other source (UCA 53B-8d; R513-9.). Non-immigrant Alien Non-immigrant alien students are exempt from paying the nonresident portion of Utah High School tuition if they attended a Utah high school for three or more years and graduated Graduate Nonresident from a Utah high school (UCA 53B-8-106; R513-13.). Waiver Nonresident To help transition to the stricter residency requirements established in 2002, 250 Transition Waivers waivers for up to half of the nonresident portion of tuition and 250 for up to 100 percent of the nonresident portion of tuition are distributed to USHE institutions. Students receiving a tuition waiver for more than 50 percent of the nonresident differential may not be counted for state enrollment funding. These waivers are repealed July 1, 2009 (UCA 53B-8-104.5; R513-6.). Tuition Exemption for On the basis of surplus space, a licensed public school educator is exempt for Public School tuition in courses that satisfy professional licensing requirements if the educator is Teachers not matriculated in a graduate degree program and if the course does not have a principle purpose to serve educators (UCA 53A-6-104; R513-10.). Tuition Students who successfully complete a technologically-delivered concurrent Reimbursement for enrollment course in Mandarin Chinese can receive tuition reimbursement for a Sequential Mandarin sequential Mandarin Chinese course they successfully complete with a B grade or Chinese Courses above at an institution within the state system of higher education (UCA 53A-15- 101.5; R513-13.). Nonresident Summer All or part of the difference between resident and nonresident tuition can be School Tuition waived for nonresident summer school students (UCA 53B-8-101(4); R513-3.5.). Waivers Purple Heart Utah residents that have received the Purple Heart award as a result of military Recipient Waivers service, admitted as a full-time, part-time or summer school student enrolled in an undergraduate program of study leading to a degree or certificate shall have their undergraduate tuition waived by the USHE institution. (UCA 53B-8e-101; R513- 14.).

20 Table 13 USHE Statutory Tuition Waivers (1), (2), (3)

2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04

Resident Tuition Waivers Resident 10% Meritorious/Impecunious UU $2,423,840 $2,659,550 $3,461,268 $3,800,597 USU 2,713,641 2,939,175 3,101,176 3,495,089 WSU 2,015,788 2,241,176 2,705,677 2,819,825 SUU 769,283 840,076 891,228 1,046,643 Snow 237,196 285,894 286,777 234,645 DSC 431,970 482,283 535,113 578,098 CEU 223,002 245,940 239,621 221,610 UVSC 1,476,423 1,766,210 2,357,893 2,610,226 SLCC 875,463 984,380 1,083,592 1,159,684 UCAT n/a 41,129 78,267 96,586 Subtotal $11,166,606 $12,485,813 $14,740,612 $16,063,003

Resident National Guard Waivers Set-aside UU $0 $0 $0 $49,675 USU 0 0 0 58,096 WSU 0 0 0 48,990 SUU 0 0 0 25,652 Snow 0000 DSC0000 CEU 0 0 0 1,406 UVSC 0 0 0 59,081 SLCC 0 0 0 18,667 UCAT 0000 Subtotal $0 $0 $0 $261,567

Critical Occupations UU $0 $0 $0 $0 USU0000 WSU0000 SUU0000 Snow 0000 DSC0000 CEU0000 UVSC 0000 SLCC 0000 UCAT 0 94,680 0 0 Subtotal $0 $94,680 $0 $0

Senior Citizens UU $296,824 $305,222 $275,059 $275,416 USU0000 WSU0000 SUU0000 Snow 0000 DSC 31,156 44,966 58,629 61,487 CEU 2,446 2,983 3,182 4,275 UVSC 17,514 19,498 25,993 31,753 SLCC 123,070 124,681 0 66,941 UCAT 0000 Subtotal $471,010 $497,350 $362,863 $439,872

21 Table 13 USHE Statutory Tuition Waivers (1), (2), (3)

2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04

Police or Firefighter Survivor UU $0 $0 $0 $9,695 USU0000 WSU0000 SUU0000 Snow 0000 DSC0000 CEU0000 UVSC 0 0 0 2,072 SLCC 0000 UCAT 0000 Subtotal $0 $0 $0 $11,767

Wards of the State UU $0 $0 $0 $0 USU0000 WSU0000 SUU0000 Snow 0000 DSC0000 CEU0000 UVSC 0000 SLCC 0000 UCAT 0000 Subtotal $0 $0 $0 $0

Public School Teachers UU $0 $0 $0 $0 USU 0 0 0 631,353 WSU0000 SUU0000 Snow 0000 DSC0000 CEU0000 UVSC 0000 SLCC 0000 UCAT 0000 Subtotal $0 $0 $0 $631,353

Sequential Mandarin Chinese UU $0 $0 $0 $0 USU0000 WSU0000 SUU0000 Snow 0000 DSC0000 CEU0000 UVSC 0000 SLCC 0000 UCAT 0000 Subtotal $0 $0 $0 $0

22 Table 13 USHE Statutory Tuition Waivers (1), (2), (3)

2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04

Total Resident Waivers UU $2,720,664 $2,964,772 $3,736,327 $4,135,383 USU 2,713,641 2,939,175 3,101,176 4,184,538 WSU 2,015,788 2,241,176 2,705,677 2,868,815 SUU 769,283 840,076 891,228 1,072,295 Snow 237,196 285,894 286,777 234,645 DSC 463,126 527,249 593,742 639,585 CEU 225,448 248,923 242,803 227,291 UVSC 1,493,937 1,785,708 2,383,886 2,703,132 SLCC 998,533 1,109,061 1,083,592 1,245,292 UCAT n/a 135,809 78,267 96,586 Total Resident $11,637,616 $12,942,034 $15,025,208 $17,310,976

Nonresident Tuition Waivers Meritorious Nonresident Undergraduate UU $1,350,827 $1,468,480 $1,501,127 $1,007,110 USU 1,643,229 1,761,820 2,050,931 1,032,411 WSU 270,173 324,318 404,926 354,057 SUU 172,907 314,150 338,231 393,485 Snow 27,135 33,752 40,337 42,575 DSC 34,884 59,976 62,074 91,068 CEU 27,312 24,837 43,914 174,087 UVSC 176,750 190,759 286,497 357,168 SLCC 28,833 24,131 17,853 78,568 Subtotal $3,732,050 $4,202,223 $4,745,890 $3,530,529

Meritorious Nonresident Graduate Waivers UU $1,174,319 $4,194,610 $4,279,584 $0 USU 2,071,950 1,706,811 2,267,313 2,317,372 WSU 13,328 22,030 42,745 23,717 SUU0000 Snow 0000 DSC0000 CEU0000 UVSC 0000 SLCC 0000 Subtotal $3,259,597 $5,923,451 $6,589,642 $2,341,089

WICHE / WUE UU $657,685 $635,763 $0 $858,469 USU 626,725 628,679 1,137,378 858,785 WSU 478,722 517,660 580,088 610,048 SUU 497,931 520,137 556,536 579,682 Snow 363,132 290,878 296,686 288,353 DSC 278,151 382,102 395,016 404,057 CEU 94,469 95,764 115,651 0 UVSC 0 173,257 203,053 230,490 SLCC 79,386 90,994 71,908 129,672 Subtotal $3,076,201 $3,335,234 $3,356,316 $3,959,556

23 Table 13 USHE Statutory Tuition Waivers (1), (2), (3)

2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04

Reciprocal Agreements UU $0 $0 $0 $0 USU 0 0 0 798,583 WSU0000 SUU0000 Snow 0000 DSC0000 CEU0000 UVSC 0000 SLCC 0000 Subtotal $0 $0 $0 $798,583

Border Waivers UU $0 $0 $0 $0 USU 1,007,707 1,092,505 0 439,355 WSU 23,909 23,447 32,846 37,599 SUU 138,556 148,457 129,810 134,100 Snow 0 0 0 18,808 DSC 190,593 199,663 157,308 209,539 CEU 9,055 3,622 0 8,273 UVSC 0000 SLCC 0 0 0 1,060 Subtotal $1,369,820 $1,467,694 $319,964 $848,734

Non-immigrant Alien Utah High School Graduates UU $0 $0 $0 $0 USU0000 WSU 0 0 0 21,048 SUU 0 0 0 10,728 Snow 0000 DSC0000 CEU0000 UVSC 0 0 0 94,740 SLCC 0 0 0 111,974 Subtotal $0 $0 $0 $238,490

Nonresident Transition Waivers UU $0 $0 $0 $122,946 USU 0 0 0 205,239 WSU 0 0 0 135,014 SUU 0 0 0 145,724 Snow 0000 DSC 0 0 0 390,189 CEU0000 UVSC 0000 SLCC 0000 Subtotal $0 $0 $0 $999,112

24 Table 13 USHE Statutory Tuition Waivers (1), (2), (3)

2000-01 2001-02 2002-03 2003-04

Nonresident Summer Waivers UU $0 $0 $0 $0 USU 0 0 870,440 0 WSU0000 SUU0000 Snow 0000 DSC0000 CEU0000 UVSC 0000 SLCC 0000 Subtotal $0 $0 $870,440 $0

Total Nonresident Waivers UU $3,182,831 $6,298,853 $5,780,711 $1,988,525 USU $5,349,611 $5,189,815 $6,326,062 $5,651,745 WSU 786,132 887,455 1,060,605 1,181,483 SUU 809,394 982,744 1,024,577 1,263,719 Snow 390,267 324,630 337,023 349,736 DSC 503,628 641,741 614,398 1,094,853 CEU 130,836 124,223 159,565 182,360 UVSC 176,750 364,016 489,550 682,398 SLCC 108,219 115,125 89,761 321,274 Total Nonresident $11,437,668 $14,928,602 $15,882,252 $12,716,093

Total Waivers (Resident and Nonresident) UU $5,903,495 $9,263,625 $9,517,038 $6,123,908 USU 8,063,252 8,128,990 9,427,238 9,836,283 WSU 2,801,920 3,128,631 3,766,282 4,050,298 SUU 1,578,677 1,822,820 1,915,805 2,336,014 Snow 627,463 610,524 623,800 584,381 DSC 966,754 1,168,990 1,208,140 1,734,438 CEU 356,284 373,146 402,368 409,651 UVSC 1,670,687 2,149,724 2,873,436 3,385,530 SLCC 1,106,752 1,224,186 1,173,353 1,566,566 Total Nonresident $23,075,284 $27,870,636 $30,907,460 $30,027,069

(1) New waivers beginning 2003-2004 are National Guard Waiver Set Aside, Public School Teachers Waiver, Non-immigran Alien Utah High School Graduates, and Nonresident Transition Waivers (2) Police or Firefigher Survivors, Wards of the State, Reciprocal Agreements, and Non Resident Summer Waivers not previously reported prior to 2002-2003 (3) No waivers were granted for Critical Occupations or Sequential Mandarin Chinese 2000-01 through 2003-04

VII. TUITION SET ASIDES FOR NEED-BASED FINANCIAL AID

Because of a concern over rapid tuition increases and no additional state support for student financial aid programs, beginning with the 2002-03 academic year the State Board of Regents began setting aside a portion of the revenue from the tuition increase for that year to support need-based student financial aid programs at USHE institutions. In some cases, institutions have added to these sources with revenue from their institution specific, second-tier tuition increases. Information on the number of students served and type of awards can be found in the following table.

26 Table 14 USHE First Tier Tutition Set Aside for Finanical Aid

Utilization of Funds for Eligible Purposes Producitivity Measures Budget Expenditure Category 2003-04 2004-05 Measure 2003-04 Budget 2004-05 University of Utah Number of Number of Students Average Amount Students Average Amount Receiving Received Receiving Received Need-based Grants $643,900 $1,007,649 Number of Students Receiving Need-based Grants 1123 $573 1862 $541 Need-based Loans 0 0 Number of Students Receiving Need-based Loans 0 $0 0 $0 Need-based Work Study Awards 0 0 Number of Students Receiving Need-based Work Study Awards 0 $0 0 $0 Total Number of Unduplicated Students Receiving Need-based Other _ Tier Tuition Based Scholarships 0 0 Financial Aid from set aside first tier tuition 1123 $573 1862 $541

Total Expenditures $643,900 $1,007,649 Utah State University Need-based Grants $12,200 $12,200 Number of Students Receiving Need-based Grants 5 $2,440 5 $2,440 Need-based Loans 0 0 Number of Students Receiving Need-based Loans 0 $0 0 $0 Need-based Work Study Awards 355,500 355,500 Number of Students Receiving Need-based Work Study Awards 237 $1,500 237 $1,500 Total Number of Unduplicated Students Receiving Need-based Other _ Tier Tuition Based Scholarships 0 0 Financial Aid from set aside first tier tuition 242 $1,519 242 $1,519

Total Expenditures $367,700 $367,700 Weber State University Need-based Grants Number of Students Receiving Need-based Grants 0 $0 0 $0 Need-based Loans Number of Students Receiving Need-based Loans 0 $0 0 $0 Need-based Work Study Awards Number of Students Receiving Need-based Work Study Awards 0 $0 0 $0 Total Number of Unduplicated Students Receiving Need-based Other _ Tier Tuition Based Scholarships 337,613 259,025 Financial Aid from set aside first tier tuition 597 $566 344 $753

Total Expenditures $337,613 $259,025 Southern Utah University Need-based Grants $85,000 $127,500 Number of Students Receiving Need-based Grants 61 $1,393 91 $1,401 Need-based Loans Number of Students Receiving Need-based Loans 0 $0 0 $0 Need-based Work Study Awards Number of Students Receiving Need-based Work Study Awards 0 $0 0 $0 Total Number of Unduplicated Students Receiving Need-based Other _ Tier Tuition Based Scholarships Financial Aid from set aside first tier tuition 61 $1,393 91 $1,401

Total Expenditures $85,000 $127,500 Snow College Need-based Grants $28,200 $45,800 Number of Students Receiving Need-based Grants 41 $688 61 $751 Need-based Loans 0 0 Number of Students Receiving Need-based Loans 0 $0 0 $0 Need-based Work Study Awards 0 0 Number of Students Receiving Need-based Work Study Awards 0 $0 0 $0 Total Number of Unduplicated Students Receiving Need-based Other _ Tier Tuition Based Scholarships 0 0 Financial Aid from set aside first tier tuition 41 $688 61 $751

Total Expenditures $28,200 $45,800 Dixie State College Need-based Grants $40,100 $20,900 Number of Students Receiving Need-based Grants 43 $933 22 $933 Need-based Loans 0 0 Number of Students Receiving Need-based Loans 0 $0 0 $0 Need-based Work Study Awards 0 0 Number of Students Receiving Need-based Work Study Awards 0 $0 0 $0 Total Number of Unduplicated Students Receiving Need-based Other _ Tier Tuition Based Scholarships 0 0 Financial Aid from set aside first tier tuition 43 $933 22 $933

Total Expenditures $40,100 $20,900 College of Eastern Utah Need-based Grants Number of Students Receiving Need-based Grants Need-based Loans Number of Students Receiving Need-based Loans Need-based Work Study Awards Number of Students Receiving Need-based Work Study Awards Total Number of Unduplicated Students Receiving Need-based Other _ Tier Tuition Based Scholarships Financial Aid from set aside first tier tuition

Total Expenditures $0 $0 Utah Valley State College Need-based Grants $50,064 $204,000 Number of Students Receiving Need-based Grants 120 $417 138 $1,478 Need-based Loans 214,491 60,555 Number of Students Receiving Need-based Loans 408 $506 115 $527 Need-based Work Study Awards 0 Number of Students Receiving Need-based Work Study Awards 0 $0 0 $0 Total Number of Unduplicated Students Receiving Need-based Other _ Tier Tuition Based Scholarships 0 Financial Aid from set aside first tier tuition 528 $501 253 $1,046

Total Expenditures $264,555 $264,555 Salt Lake Community College Need-based Grants $213,700 $213,700 Number of Students Receiving Need-based Grants 299 $715 295 $724 Need-based Loans Number of Students Receiving Need-based Loans 0 $0 0 Need-based Work Study Awards Number of Students Receiving Need-based Work Study Awards 0 $0 0 Total Number of Unduplicated Students Receiving Need-based Other _ Tier Tuition Based Scholarships Financial Aid from set aside first tier tuition 299 $715 295 $724

Total Expenditures $213,700 $213,700 Utah System of Higher Education Need-based Grants $1,073,164 $1,631,749 Number of Students Receiving Need-based Grants 1692 $634 2474 $660 Need-based Loans 214,491 60,555 Number of Students Receiving Need-based Loans 408 $526 115 $527 Need-based Work Study Awards 355,500 355,500 Number of Students Receiving Need-based Work Study Awards 237 $1,500 237 $1,500 Total Number of Unduplicated Students Receiving Need-based Other _ Tier Tuition Based Scholarships 337,613 259,025 Financial Aid from set aside first tier tuition 2934 $675 3170 $728

Total Expenditures $1,980,768 $2,306,829

27 TAB N & Attachments

January 5, 2005

TO: State Board of Regents FROM: Richard E. Kendell SUBJECT: General Consent Calendar

The Commissioner recommends that the Regents approve the following items on the General Consent Calendar:

A. Minutes – Minutes of the Regular Board of Regents Meeting held December 9, 2004 at the Board of Regents’ Offices in Salt Lake City, Utah.

B. Grant Proposals - Approval to submit the following proposal: Utah State University – Office of Naval Research; “Site Support for the Advanced Airborne Test Facility (AATF) at Makaha Ridge;” $12,327,007. Jim Marshall, Principal Investigator.

C. Executive Session(s) — Approval to hold an executive session or sessions prior to or in connection with the meetings of the State Board of Regents to be held March 17-18, 2005, at Dixie State College in St. George, Utah, to consider property transactions, personnel issues, litigation, and such other matters permitted by the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act.

Richard E. Kendell, Commissioner RK:jc Attachment INDEX OF MINUTES UTAH STATE BOARD OF REGENTS BOARD OF REGENTS OFFICES, THE GATEWAY December 9, 2004

Roll Call ...... 1

COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

“Measuring Up” Report Card – Discussion with Pat Callan ...... 3

Reports of Board Committees

Academic, Career & Technical Education, and Student Success Committee University of Utah – Doctorate Degree in Physical Therapy...... 5 University of Utah – Bachelor of Science Degree in Business with a Major in Entrepreneurship ...... 6 Recommendation of Name Change for Committee ...... 6 Consent Calendar ...... 6 Information Calendar ...... 6 Proposed Revisions to Policy R512, Determination of Resident Status ...... 7

Finance, Facilities and Accountability Committee Authority to Seek Revenue Bond Financing ...... 7 Proposed Revisions to Policy R512, Determination of Resident Status ...... 7 University of Utah – Authorization for Differential Tuition for Master of Science Degree in Genetic Counseling ...... 7 University of Utah – Long-Range Development Plan ...... 8 USHE/University of Utah – Research Facilities Revenue Bonds, Series 2005A (Moran Eye Center) ...... 8 Salt Lake Community College – Lease to Museum of Utah Art and History ...... 8 Salt Lake Community College – Purchase of Property Adjacent to South City Campus ...... 9 Consent Calendar ...... 9 Annual Report on Leased Space ...... 9 Financial Ratios in the USHE ...... 9 Institutional Residence Report ...... 9 UHEAA Board of Directors Report ...... 9

General Consent Calendar ...... 10

Progress Report – SLCC/UCAT Strategic Alliance ...... 12

Recognitions President Gregory G. Fitch ...... 13 Dr. Don Carpenter ...... 13 Lieutenant Governor Gayle S. McKeachnie ...... 14 Governor Olene S. Walker ...... 14

Report of the Commissioner ...... 15 Introduction of Amanda Covington Dates to Calendar Notable Accomplishments

Adjournment...... 15 Tab N, Page 4 of 17 & Attachments MINUTES OF MEETING UTAH STATE BOARD OF REGENTS BOARD OF REGENTS OFFICES, THE GATEWAY DECEMBER 9, 2004

Regents Present Regents Excused Nolan E. Karras, Chair E. George Mantes, Vice Chair Jerry C. Atkin Linnea S. Barney Daryl C. Barrett Bonnie Jean Beesley Kim R. Burningham Katharine B. Garff David J. Grant Meghan Holbrook James S. Jardine Michael R. Jensen David J. Jordan Trenton Kemp Jed H. Pitcher Sara V. Sinclair Marlon O. Snow Maria Sweeten

Office of the Commissioner Richard E. Kendell, Commissioner David L. Buhler, Associate Commissioner for Public Affairs Don A. Carpenter, Executive Assistant Joyce Cottrell, Executive Secretary Brian Foisy, Assistant Commissioner for Financial Services Phyllis C. Safman, Assistant Commissioner for Academic Affairs Mark H. Spencer, Associate Commissioner for Finance and Facilities and Interim Executive Director, UHEAA Lucille T. Stoddard, Interim Associate Commissioner for Academic Affairs Kevin Walthers, Assistant Commissioner for Finance and Facilities Lynne Ward, Assistant Commissioner and Executive Director, UESP Gary S. Wixom, Assistant Commissioner for Applied Technology Education and Special Projects

INSTITUTIONAL REPRESENTATIVES

University of Utah A. Lorris Betz, Senior Vice President for Health Sciences John G. Francis, Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs Paul T. Brinkman, Associate Vice President for Budget and Planning Laura Snow, Special Assistant to the President and Secretary to the University Michael Perez, Associate Vice President for Facilities Minutes of Meeting Tab N, Page 5 of 17 & Attachments Utah State Board of Regents December 9, 2004 Page 5 Utah State University Kermit L. Hall, President Stan Albrecht, Executive Vice President and Provost Ron Godfrey, Vice President for Business and Finance Sydney Peterson, Assistant Provost

Weber State University F. Ann Millner, President Brad Mortensen, Assistant Vice President for Support and Auxiliary Services Norman C. Tarbox, Jr., Vice President for Administrative Services Michael Vaughn, Provost Cody S. Jones, Student Body President/President, Utah Student Association

Southern Utah University Steven D. Bennion, President Abe Harraf, Provost Dorian Page, Associate Vice President for Administrative and Financial Services Gregory Stauffer, Vice President for Administrative and Financial Services Aaron Miller, Student Body President/Vice President, Utah Student Association

Snow College Michael T. Benson, President Bradley A. Winn, Provost

Dixie State College Robert C. Huddleston, President Phil Alletto, Vice President of Student Services Lee Caldwell, Academic Vice President Stanley J. Plewe, Vice President of College Services

College of Eastern Utah Ryan L. Thomas, President Mike King, Academic Vice President

Utah Valley State College William A. Sederburg, President Brad Cook, Vice President for Academic Affairs Wayne Hanewicz, Visiting Professor, Technology Management Dee Martin, Dean, School of Technology, Trades and Industry Jeff Maxfield, Academic Department Chair, Utah Fire and Rescue Academy Val Peterson, Vice President for Administration and External Affairs

Salt Lake Community College Judd D. Morgan, Interim President Julie Ann Curtis, Assistant to the Academic Vice President Minutes of Meeting Tab N, Page 6 of 17 & Attachments Utah State Board of Regents December 9, 2004 Page 6 Larry Landward, Director, Main Street Center John Latkiewicz, Dean, Skills Center Don Porter, Vice President of Administrative Services David Richardson, Vice President of Academic Services Dave Thomas, Chair, SLCC Board of Trustees

Utah College of Applied Technology Gregory G. Fitch, President Linda Fife, Campus President, Salt Lake-Tooele ATC Kimberly Henrie, Budget Officer

Representatives of the Press Stephen Speckman, Deseret Morning News Amy K. Stewart, Standard-Examiner Shinika A. Sykes, Salt Lake Tribune

Others Steve Allred, Office of the Legislative Fiscal Analyst Carrie Flamm, Executive Director, Utah Student Association Boyd Garriott, Office of the Legislative Fiscal Analyst Debbie Headden, Office of the Legislative Fiscal Analyst Kim Hood, Governor’s Office of Planning and Budget Happi Peterson, Utah Student Association

Chair Nolan Karras called the meeting to order at 9:10 a.m. and welcomed everyone to the meeting. He excused Vice Chair Mantes, who had a previous commitment. He thanked Dr. Lorris Betz for the hospitality shown to the Regents and Presidents at dinner the previous evening and asked him to convey the Board’s appreciation to President Young and Senior Vice President Dave Pershing.

“Measuring Up” Report Card – Discussion with Pat Callan

Commissioner Kendell introduced Dr. Pat Callan, president of The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. For the past several years, Dr. Callan has prepared a national report card for higher education (see Tab A). Dr. Kendell invited Dr. Callan to talk informally with the Regents and Presidents about the report card project as well as the pressing policy issues facing higher education.

Dr. Callan thanked Commissioner Kendell for inviting him to attend the meeting. He explained that in 1968 a group of individuals felt there should be a non-profit organization which would focus on the public part of higher education – where government and higher education interact. That organization became The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. Some issues to be considered were: What does the country need from higher education? What do the states need? What is helping or impeding that organization? The organization’s primary interest is on the states, where most policy funding decisions are made. Minutes of Meeting Tab N, Page 7 of 17 & Attachments Utah State Board of Regents December 9, 2004 Page 7 After two years of consulting with higher education organizations, legislators, and researchers, they decided the most important thing to focus on was what is going on in the country that is different from 20-30 years ago with which higher education should be involved or which would affect higher education. The biggest losers in the American economy have been those individuals with high school education or less. For these people, the average real income has not improved or has decreased.

Recent economic development discussions have focused on education for the workforce. The present thinking is that “This economy does not care about place; it will bring the jobs to where the trained workers are.” Another significant issue is the forthcoming retirement of baby boomers.

“Measuring Up” became a report card to measure results, not to define performance measures. It is limited to educating and training through the baccalaureate degree. Categories measured include preparation, opportunity, completion, affordability (driven by family income), benefits, and student learning. Dr. Callan explained that every state had received an Incomplete in student learning because insufficient data were available to make an assessment.

The 2004 Report Card measured 2004 data against 1994 data and determined improvements or lack of improvement in the areas measured. States were also compared with other states. Every generation of Americans has been better educated than the previous generation.

Utah’s strength is its preparation for college. Utah is also doing better than most in degree completion. The country is in a transition, trying to determine how to deal with the economy and still provide affordable education to the citizens. Demands outstrip the traditional ideas of success. Dr. Callan noted that the report card measured Utah against other states, and was not based solely on our institutions. The issues of preparation, capacity and affordability need to be addressed simultaneously.

Dr. Callan offered to respond to questions. Commissioner Kendell noted that Utah’s economic benefits have decreased by 12% over the past decade, while there has been a nationwide increase of 18%. Dr. Callan said the message is not that higher education has been a bad investment. It is rather that we have to work on the economic development aspect as well. Some states have benefitted from their investment more than others.

Regent Snow asked, “How can we improve at trying to find funds and financial strength to educate our students?” Dr. Callan said in the past decade we have widened the gap based on income but have not made a dent in increasing need-based financial aid. Many first-generation students are of ethnic backgrounds and are from families of low income. Community colleges have become too expensive, especially in states like Utah. Need-based financial aid needs more emphasis.

Commissioner Kendell asked about contributions in terms of the proportion of family income required for a student to go to college. Utah also has the issue of multiple college students per household. Dr. Callan said states need to determine their own appropriate levels; some areas may need to be adjusted.

President Hall pointed out that with the privatization of public research universities and the costs rising for families with higher family incomes, there is not much appetite for the legislature or the public to subsidize elite institutions because they are no longer accessible for the average student. Differential funding of institutions may be one way to address the issue of affordability. Minutes of Meeting Tab N, Page 8 of 17 & Attachments Utah State Board of Regents December 9, 2004 Page 8 Dr. Callan asked, “Should these elite institutions receive special status? Is there a better way of subsidizing the institutions?” There is a direct link between family income and the type of institutions students select and attend. These elite institutions are still public entities. While research universities especially are bringing in much more income through grants and contracts, they are still public universities.

Commissioner Kendell thanked Dr. Callan for his comments. Chair Karras recommended that the Regents read both the Utah and National reports for further discussion in a future Board meeting. Quality is a pressing issue. What should we be measuring for affordability? He asked Dr. Callan how best to determine the balance between state investment and the student’s ability to pay. Dr. Callan said a percentage is not sustainable, nor is tying to a measure of inflation. There is no single best measure; however, if the economy is going well and family income is improving, higher education should be able to get a share of state funds. Another issue is political sustainability. Chair Karras thanked Dr. Callan for participating in the meeting.

The Regents went to their committee meetings at 10:10 a.m. Following lunch, the Committee of the Whole resumed at 1:40 p.m.

Reports of Board Committees

Academic, Career and Technical Education, and Student Success Committee (Programs Committee) University of Utah – Doctoral Degree in Physical Therapy (Tab B). Chair Jardine explained that the physical therapy discipline has been moving nationally from a master’s degree to a doctorate degree. Approval of a Doctorate of Physical Therapy (DPT) Degree will make the University consistent with national requirement trends and Commission on Accreditation in Physical Therapy Education (CAPTE) standards. This program will replace the current MPT (Master of Physical Therapy) program, with no additional costs. The committee approved the program and recommended it to the full Board for approval. Chair Jardine moved approval of the University of Utah’s Doctorate of Physical Therapy Degree, effective Summer Semester 2005. The motion was seconded by Regent Beesley and carried.

University of Utah – Bachelor of Science Degree in Business with a Major in Entrepreneurship (Tab C). Chair Jardine said this program had been requested before the moratorium was enacted. It is a cross-disciplinary program which will allow the Major in Entrepreneurship. The request had moved through the Program Review Committee (PRC) and the Programs Committee, and upon recommendation of the committee, Chair Jardine moved approval of the University of Utah’s Bachelor of Science Degree in Business with a Major in Entrepreneurship. The motion was seconded by Regent Barrett and carried.

Recommendation of Name Change for Committee (Tab D). Chair Jardine said at his recommendation, the committee had decided not to change the formal name of the committee but to add “(Programs Committee)” after the entire name. Informally, it will be called the Programs Committee. Regent Jardine moved that name of the committee be Academic, Career and Technical Education, and Student Success Committee (Programs Committee). The motion was seconded by Regent Garff and carried unanimously.

Consent Calendar, Programs Committee (Tab E). Chair Jardine said the committee felt good about all of the issues presented in the Consent Calendar. UVSC’s Institute of Emergency Services and Homeland Security generated a long discussion in committee. College officials wanted the Regents to understand the long-term Minutes of Meeting Tab N, Page 9 of 17 & Attachments Utah State Board of Regents December 9, 2004 Page 9 ramifications for the System. This is not a major or a degree and does not add new programs. Rather, it allows a program dynamic for departments to talk to each other and will allow the Institute to apply for federal funds to be used in the school. A question arose about whether the Regents wanted to have a plan for Homeland Security on a System level. On the institutional level, many of the colleges and universities are doing things related to Homeland Security, but those things differ according to the role and mission of the institution. Additional program requests from other schools would be considered on their own merit.

Upon motion by Regent Snow and second by Regent Grant, the following items were approved on the Programs Committee’s Consent Calendar:

A. University of Utah 1. Utah Center for Advanced Imaging Research 2. Osher Institute for Lifelong Learning B. Weber State University – Paramedic Program to be Offered Off-Campus C. Southern Utah University – Discontinuation of Dance Education Minor D. Utah Valley State College 1. Sheet Metal Apprentice Emphasis in A.A.S. Degree 2. Institute for Emergency Services and Homeland Security E. Ogden-Weber Applied Technology College – Request for Fast-track Approval 1. Restaurant/Hospitality Management 2. Biomedical Technician

Information Calendar, Programs Committee (Tab F). Chair Jardine said the committee had taken the time to understand the reorganization of the academic departments at Salt Lake Community College. Several years ago an organizational move was made to decentralize the College. The new plan will move things back to a more functional structure on a centralized basis. Name changes discussed on the Information Calendar included:

A. University of Utah – Department of Pharmacy Practice to Department of Pharmacotherapy B. Weber State University – Computer and Design Graphics Technology Program to Design Graphics Engineering Technology Program C. Southern Utah University – Department of Art to Department of Art and Design D. Salt Lake Community College – Applied Technology Education to Career and Technology Education

Proposed Revisions to Policy R512, Determination of Resident Status (Tab H). Chair Jardine said the Programs Committee was supportive of the proposed revisions to Policy R512. He asked to reserve comments until the other committee reported on this topic.

Finance, Facilities and Accountability Committee Chair Karras said Chair Pitcher had to attend another meeting and had asked to be excused from the afternoon session. He asked Vice Chair Atkin to report on the committee’s actions.

USHE – Authority to Seek Revenue Bond Financing (Tab G). Vice Chair Atkin explained that the Regents were required to formally authorize the Commissioner to take to the Legislature the two revenue bond projects approved in the October Board meeting to the Legislature. Vice Chair Atkin moved that the Regents authorize the Commissioner to take the University of Utah Hospital and Parking Structure and the Weber State Minutes of Meeting Tab N, Page 10 of 17 & Attachments Utah State Board of Regents December 9, 2004 Page 10 University Shepard Union Building Renovation to the Legislature for approval. The motion was seconded by Regent Jensen and carried.

Proposed Revisions to Policy R512, Determination of Resident Status (Tab H). Vice Chair Atkin said that the proposed revisions would clarify qualifications of residency by providing an avenue for someone to demonstrate that they had moved to Utah for employment rather than strictly for college. In effect, this policy provides an avenue for individuals to challenge their status or classification as a non-resident. Regent Jardine said a question had been raised in his committee about whether or not the Regents had ever looked at the policy in full to see if it was actually serving the students’ needs. Vice Chair Atkin moved the proposed revisions to Policy R512. The motion was seconded by Regent Sweeten and carried.

University of Utah – Authorization for Differential Tuition for Master of Science Degree in Genetic Counseling (Tab I). Vice Chair Atkin said the University was proposing the differential tuition because of the costs involving intensive clinical training. The proposed increase would make it possible to provide faculty to support six clinical settings and was consistent with similar clinical-intensive medical education programs in other universities. Vice Chair Atkin moved approval of the University’s request for Differential Tuition for the Master of Science Degree in Genetic Counseling. The motion was seconded by Regent Jensen and carried. Regent Jensen requested that the institutions provide greater detail of financial need in their requests for differential tuition.

University of Utah – Long-Range Development Plan (Tab J). Vice Chair Atkin explained that this Supplement was the University’s first step toward a more comprehensive long-range master plan. The complete long-range development plan will follow in another year or two. Senior Vice President Betz said the University’s last full strategic plan was completed in 1997. The University is facing the issue of replacing worn-out buildings while engaging in an academic strategic plan. University officials did not want the long-range development plan to precede the academic plan. The academic strategic plan will be completed in the next several months, and the facilities plan will follow. Vice Chair Atkin moved approval of the University of Utah’s 2003 Long-Range Development Plan Supplement. The motion was seconded by Regent Snow and carried.

USHE/University of Utah – Research Facilities Revenue Bonds, Series 2005A (Moran Eye Center) (Tab K). Vice Chair Atkin reported that a large part of the funding for this project would come from private donors with the balance to come from revenues from the Moran Eye Center as part of the UUHC business plan. Vice Chair Atkin moved adoption of the bond resolution. The motion was seconded by Regent Sweeten and carried by the following vote:

AYE: Nolan E. Karras, Chair Jerry C. Atkin Daryl C. Barrett Bonnie Jean Beesley Katharine B. Garff David J. Grant Meghan Holbrook James S. Jardine Michael R. Jensen Trenton Kemp Sara V. Sinclair Minutes of Meeting Tab N, Page 11 of 17 & Attachments Utah State Board of Regents December 9, 2004 Page 11 Marlon O. Snow Maria Sweeten

NAY: (None)

Salt Lake Community College – Lease to Museum of Utah Art and History (Tab L). Vice Chair Atkin said the Museum of Utah Art and History (MUAH) had asked to lease 20,000 square feet of the SLCC Main Street Center for specialized exhibits, office space and work areas, at the rate of $8.00/square foot with an allowance for inflation over the 15-year term of the lease. Cost of utilities will be shared. SLCC and MUAH may jointly extend the lease for four ten-year periods. Vice Chair Atkin said the committee had asked for a buyout option to allow the College to cancel the lease, should the need arise. Vice Chair Atkin moved approval of the lease with the addition of a buyout option, with final action to be approved by the Regents’ Executive Committee. The motion was seconded by Regent Snow and carried.

Salt Lake Community College – Purchase of Property Adjacent to the South City Campus (Tab M). Vice Chair Atkin said the property in question was part of a future expansion to SLCC’s Campus Master Plan. The property contains a duplex and is valued at $195,000. The owner is willing to sell the property for $172,000 plus closing costs and will receive credit for a $23,000 donation to the College. Vice Chair Atkin moved approval of the property purchase. The motion was seconded by Regent Kemp and carried.

Consent Calendar, Finance Committee (Tab N). On motion by Vice Chair Atkin and second by Regent Holbrook, the Regents approved the Capital Facilities Delegation Reports from the University of Utah and Utah State University on the Committee’s Consent Calendar.

USHE – Annual Report on Leased Space (Tab O). Vice Chair Atkin referred to the report in Tab O and said the committee had discussed the report and questions were answered. The notable change at the University of Utah was due to the new Orthopedic Hospital. This report was prepared for the Regents’ information only and required no action.

Financial Ratios in the USHE (Tab P). Vice Chair Atkin said the Commissioner’s staff had been asked to gather data so that the Regents could make an informed judgment about the borrowing limit of the institutions and the System. He referred to the Attachment to Tab P, page 1 of Attachment 1. For FY2003, the long-term debt was $481 million for the System, $333 million of which was for the University of Utah ($120 million on student housing, $50 million for the Rice-Eccles Stadium, and the balance on other projects). Vice Chair Atkin also referred to page 7 of Attachment 3. In relation to total expenses and in terms of total budget, the long-term debt is relatively small, and we seem to be in line in terms of revenue stream and assets.

Chair Karras referred to Attachment 1 and noted that of the $2.6 billion revenue, only $589 million came from State appropriations. Vice Chair Atkin said the committee felt the report helped to put debt ratios in perspective for them. President Sederburg noted the relatively low percentage of debt ratio. He asked if data were available to compare other states with the debt level at our institutions. Associate Commissioner Spencer said other states are struggling with the same process of identifying data. Vice Chair Atkin suggested it would be helpful to have this information as soon as it becomes available. Chair Karras asked Dr. Spencer to add this information to his report.

USHE – Institutional Residence Report (Tab Q). Vice Chair Atkin referred to Replacement Tab Q, Minutes of Meeting Tab N, Page 12 of 17 & Attachments Utah State Board of Regents December 9, 2004 Page 12 Attachment 1, in the Regents’ folders. The report is required annually by Board policy. Chair Karras noted that institutional residences are constantly used for business purposes.

UHEAA Board of Directors Report (Tab R). Vice Chair Atkin referred to the Supplement to Tab R, in the Regents’ folders, which contained the minutes of the December 7, 2004 meeting of the UHEAA Board of Directors.

General Consent Calendar

On motion by Regent Atkin and second by Regent Sweeten, the following items were approved on the General Consent Calendar:

A. Minutes – Minutes of the Regular Board of Regents Meetings held October 19, 2004 at the Board of Regents’ Offices in Salt Lake City, Utah. (Attachment 1)

B. Grant Proposals (On file in the Commissioner’s Office)

C. Grants Awarded 1. University of Utah – HHS/NIH/National Institute for Neurological Dis Stro; “Development of a Fully Integrated, Biocompatible Micropower Chronic Neural Recording Array;” $1,340,193. Florian Solzbacher, Principal Investigator.

2. University of Utah – HHS/NIH/National Heart Lung and Blood; “Genetics and Consequences of Nicotine Addiction;” $2,315,015. John R. Hoidal, Principal Investigator.

3. University of Utah – HHS/NIH/National Cancer Institute; “Prostate, Lung, Colo-rectal and Ovarian (PLCO) Cancer Screening Trial. National Lung Screening Trial (NLST);” $1,548,120. Saundra S. Buys, Principal Investigator.

4. University of Utah – HHS/Centers for Disease Control; “Thyroid Disease in People Exposed to Radioactive Fallout: Phase 3;” $1,499,988. Joseph L. Lyon, Principal Investigator.

5. University of Utah – HHS/NIH/Natl Inst Neurol Dis Stro; “Translational Research in the Dystrophinopathies;” $1,137,965. Kevin M. Flanigan, Principal Investigator.

6. University of Utah – HHS/NIH/National Heart Lung and Blood; “Hypergen Network Administration Center and Utah Field Center;” $1,038,363. Steven C. Hunt, Principal Investigator.

7. University of Utah – HHS/Centers for Disease Control/National Institute for Occupational Safe Health; “Occupational Safety and Health Education and Research Training Grant; “$1,031,485. Kurt T. Hegmann, Principal Investigator.

8. University of Utah – HHS/NIH/Natl Inst Neurol Dis Stro; “Identification and Characteristics of Novel Minutes of Meeting Tab N, Page 13 of 17 & Attachments Utah State Board of Regents December 9, 2004 Page 13 Therapeutics for the Treatment and Prevention of Epilepsy;” $2,220,131. H. Steve White, Principal Investigator.

9. University of Utah – National Science Foundation; “Research Training Group in Mathematical and Computational Biology;” $1,800,000. James P. Keener, Principal Investigator.

10. University of Utah – US Environmental Protection Agency; “Applied Environmental Research for the US-Mexico Border;” $2,485,300. George F. Hepner, Principal Investigator.

11. University of Utah – HHS/NIH/National Cancer Institute; “Molecular and Clinical Approaches to Colon Cancer Precursors;” $2,429,471. Randall W. Burg, Principal Investigator.

12. Utah State University – Colorado University Laboratory of Atmospheric and Space Physics; “Aeronomy of Ice in the Mesosphere (AIM), Phase B, for the Solar Occultation for Ice Experiment (SOFIE) Instrument and Science;” $1,283,330. John Kemp, Principal Investigator.

13. Utah State University – National Science Foundation; “National Center for Engineering and Technology Education;” $1,999,914. Christine E. Hailey, Principal Investigator.

14. Utah State University – State of Utah Department of Health; “Early Intervention Services for Infants with Developmental Delays;” $1,035,902. Susan Olsen, Principal Investigator.

15. Utah State University – NASA Langley Research Center; “Geostationary Imaging Fourier Transform Spectrometer (GIFTS);” $3,040,773. Gail Bingham, Principal Investigator.

16. Utah State University – USDA Cooperative State Research Service; “Implementation of Western Region Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) Proposal;” $2,721,126. V. Philip Rasmussen, Principal Investigator.

17. Utah State University – US Department of Education; “To Operate Regional Resource Center, Region No. 5, Utah State University;” $1,300,000. John Copenhaver, Principal Investigator.

18. Utah State University – NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory; “Wide-Field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE);” $3,690,000. Scott H. Schick, Principal Investigator.

D. Proposed Revisions to Policy R931, Holidays and Holiday Premium Pay. The proposed revisions bring the holiday and holiday compensation policy into agreement with the University of Utah, which is the fiscal agent for the Commissioner’s Office. With the same payroll system, this will simplify payroll processing. The change would eliminate Veterans’ Day as a holiday and would add a second personal preference day for OCHE and UHEAA employees. (Attachment 2)

E. Executive Session(s) — Approval to hold an executive session or sessions prior to or in connection with the meetings of the State Board of Regents to be held January 14, 2005, at the Board of Regents’ Offices in Salt Lake City, Utah, to consider property transactions, personnel issues, litigation, and such other matters permitted by the Utah Open and Public Meetings Act. Minutes of Meeting Tab N, Page 14 of 17 & Attachments Utah State Board of Regents December 9, 2004 Page 14

Progress Report – SLCC/UCAT Strategic Alliance

Commissioner Kendell referred to the Supplement to Tab T in the Regents’ folders. He thought it appropriate to let the Regents know what progress had been made since the original Strategic Alliance was approved by the Board in June 2004 and what challenges still remain. The “Next Steps” Action Plan was attached to the documents and included in the agenda. Dr. Kendell outlined some areas of focus:

1. High School Students. This has been an historic focus for UCAT. The number of high school students being served has decreased, which is a worry for UCAT. SLCC has also served secondary students through concurrent enrollment and tech-prep programs. This necessitates an agreement for the areas in which both institutions will focus as a primary and/or secondary provider. This is also an ongoing concern for the State Board of Education because UCAT was created, in part, to help serve the needs of high school students.

2. Complementary Roles. Progress is being made, but clearly there is overlap. Progress is limited but ongoing discussions continue.

3. Articulation Agreements between the SLCC Skills Center and the Salt Lake-Tooele ATC Certificate Programs. Agreements are not completed, but there is potential agreement.

4. Custom Fit. A positive step was taken when SLCC administration initiated a meeting with SLTATC administrators to discuss ways in which Custom Fit might be operated jointly. Commissioner Kendell noted that sometimes progress is limited by the complexity of the programs and the difficulty of trying to estimate the impact of the final outcome.

President Morgan said many attitudes had changed during the past six months. There have been opportunities for the two institutions to look at each other’s programs and work together. Discussions are ongoing. The two schools need to look at criteria which will allow both institutions to make decisions. Attitude is much more healthy, and there is a willingness to work together. President Morgan introduced Dr. John Latkiewicz, Dean of the Skills Center, who is working with SLTATC President Linda Fife.

Commissioner Kendell said the purpose of the New Directions document approved six months ago was to clarify UCAT’s unique niche to focus on competency-based, open-entry/open-exit education, driven by the job market. Their programs have a major emphasis on certificates of proficiency and certificates of completion. Other institutions administer the two-year degree programs, which should be complementary roles rather than competing roles. The New Directions document should be the roadmap to the future so that the schools do not “bump heads” throughout the State. Hopefully, the progress of the Alliance will be guided by this complementary document.

President Fitch said UCAT was created following several years of personality conflicts and problems. President Fife became a healer from the UCAT side. Due to her efforts, two grants are being administered together in a complementary effort. The Salt Lake City School District formerly did not even recognize SLTATC, and now they are engaged in dialogue. He thanked President Fife for her work in bringing about these combined efforts.

SLCC Trustee Chair Dave Thomas noted that in addition to the Alliance Agreement, it is important that the Minutes of Meeting Tab N, Page 15 of 17 & Attachments Utah State Board of Regents December 9, 2004 Page 15 right people are at the table on both sides of the issue. Success has taken place on easier issues, which will build the trust necessary to solve more complex issues. It will take time, but several steps have been taken in the right direction.

Recognitions

President Gregory G. Fitch. Commissioner Kendell acknowledged President Fitch and his contributions to the State of Utah. There could be no more difficult assignment than being the first administrator of the new Utah College of Applied Technology. Heading a new institution created by legislation has been an extraordinary task, and Dr. Fitch has been diligent and conscientious in this task. Dr. Kendell read a Resolution of Appreciation acknowledging President Fitch’s success as UCAT President and wishing him well in his new job as the Commissioner of the Missouri Higher Education Coordinating Commission. Regent Atkin moved that the Regents adopt the Resolution of Appreciation for Dr. Fitch. The motion was seconded by Regent Snow and carried unanimously.

President Fitch thanked the Commissioner and Regents for their support and said he had appreciated the great opportunity to found an institution. Success would not have been possible without the assistance of individuals from the UCAT organization and the Commissioner’s Office. He expressed particular appreciation to Sandi Grimm, Linda Fife, Brad Mortensen, Kimberly Henrie, Gary Wixom, and the rest of the Commis-sioner’s staff. He thanked the presidents for the opportunity of working with them and acknowledged that without their acceptance, UCAT would not have been able to succeed. Dr. Fitch advised the Regents that UCAT can be a tremendous benefit to the State in the area of economic development and is in a position to complement both public education and higher education.

Dr. Don Carpenter. Commissioner Kendell announced that Don Carpenter will be retiring at the end of the year after serving in the Commissioner’s Office for more than 30 years. He was hired when G. Homer Durham was Commissioner of Higher Education and subsequently worked with all of the Commissioners and most of the Regents and Presidents since the Board’s inception. Commissioner Kendell said when he first left the Commissioner’s staff, his position was filled by Dr. Carpenter. Don helped develop the first Master Plan for Vocational and Technical Education and its various revisions, which ultimately allowed the Utah Technical Colleges at Salt Lake and Provo-Orem to become Salt Lake Community College and Utah Valley Community College, respectfully. Commissioner Kendell said Dr. Carpenter had excelled in all of his assignments and was a congenial confidante, colleague and friend. He read a Resolution of Appreciation and thanked Don for his many years of service to the Utah System of Higher Education. Regent Atkin moved that the Regents adopt the Resolution of Appreciation for Dr. Carpenter. The motion was seconded by Marlon Snow and carried unanimously.

Dr. Carpenter told the Regents and Presidents that he respected very much what they do for higher education. He said it had been a joy to work with the Commissioners, Regents, Presidents and everyone in higher education. He recalled that when he and his wife moved here from California, he promised her and Commissioner Durham that he would stay for three years. He said he appreciated being able to choose when to retire.

Lieutenant Governor Gayle S. McKeachnie. Chair Karras said he was very pleased to have Governor Walker and Lieutenant Governor McKeachnie visit the meeting so the Regents could honor them for their service to higher education. Commissioner Kendell read a Resolution of Appreciation for Lieutenant Governor McKeachnie. Chair Karras said Mr. McKeachnie was one of the greatest people he had ever known in his life, with the highest Minutes of Meeting Tab N, Page 16 of 17 & Attachments Utah State Board of Regents December 9, 2004 Page 16 degree of integrity. It is clear why Governor Walker picked this extremely bright individual to be her Lieutenant Governor. Chair Karras moved that the Regents adopt the Resolution of Appreciation for Lieutenant Governor McKeachnie. The motion was seconded by Regent Snow and carried unanimously.

Lieutenant Governor McKeachnie jokingly asked, “Is this my funeral?” He said the opportunities afforded him by Governor Walker had been a great experience. He thanked the Regents and Presidents for their personal courtesies and said he treasured the associations and friendships he has had with them.

Governor Olene S. Walker. Commissioner Kendell read a Resolution of Appreciation for Governor Walker. He said she had accomplished more in her years of service than could be identified in a one-page resolution. The Governor’s mother was a well-liked elementary teacher in the Ogden School District, and her father was Dr. T. O. Smith, who was in charge of the Ogden School District. Commissioner Kendell related a personal experience he had with Dr. Smith while a student. Regent Atkin moved that the Regents adopt the Resolution of Appreciation for Governor Walker. The motion was seconded by Regent Snow and carried unanimously.

Chair Karras said he had enjoyed a long-standing relationship with the Governor. She is one of the greatest advocates of education in this state. She has gone around the state doing her job and making a difference. The public does not understand the quality of human being we have had serving us as Governor. Chair Karras thanked her for her service to the citizens of Utah.

Governor Walker quipped that she, Chair Karras and Vice Chair Mantes had served together in legislative leadership at one time and the state had not been the same since. She said she had been involved in government for the past 25 years, and it had been a remarkable experience. She thanked the Presidents and Regents for making the Utah System of Higher Education one of the greatest systems of any state in the country and urged the Presidents to continue doing their wonderful jobs.

Governor Walker said she was always appreciative that she was Governor of Utah because Utahns can tackle any issue and make it “doable.” Other states view Utah’s Workforce Services as a model. Quality education and quality jobs go hand in hand. She urged the Regents and Presidents to continue to “think outside the box” in developing ways to generate money and quality jobs. We are facing some exciting global opportunities and connections. The Governor said she hoped to get a Memorandum of Agreement among the college and university presidents on considering unified efforts in terms of global studies.

Report of the Commissioner

Introduction of Amanda Covington. Commissioner Kendell introduced Amanda Covington, Governor Walker’s Press Secretary and Director of Communications. For many years Amanda worked at the Utah Department of Transportation, where she was one of the architects of the Salt Lake City Olympic Plan. Amanda will be starting in the Commissioner’s Office on January 1. Commissioner Kendell said he was delighted to have her join his staff as Director of Communications.

Dates to Calendar. Commissioner Kendell announced the following events: • President Young’s inauguration as the President of the University of Utah on April 15, 2005. • A reception for President Greg Fitch from 3:00 to 5:00 p.m. on Monday, December 20. Minutes of Meeting Tab N, Page 17 of 17 & Attachments Utah State Board of Regents December 9, 2004 Page 17 • A reception for Dr. Don Carpenter from 3:00 to 5:00 p.m. on Wednesday, December 22. • Former Regent Charlie Johnson will be in town for the holidays. Regents and Presidents were invited to a luncheon with him on Wednesday, December 22.

Notable Accomplishments. Commissioner Kendell urged the Regents to read the institutions’ stellar accomplishments, a summary of which was in their folders.

Adjournment

Regent Snow moved that the meeting be adjourned. The motion was seconded by Regent Atkin and carried unanimously. With a cheer of “Go, Utah!”, Chair Karras declared the meeting adjourned at 3:15 p.m.

Joyce Cottrell CPS, Executive Secretary

Date Approved